An observational study in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Vaginal Surgery and Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP), sponsored by Lund University. Completed at 1 site in Sweden. Open to female participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-27.
Sponsored by Lund University · Observational
This is an observational registry-based study of long-term outcome after vaginal native tissue repair for pelvic organ prolapse designed to emulate a pragmatic open-label two-arm trial for which patients, in whom perineorrhaphy is not strictly indicated but clinically tenable, perioperatively are randomized to concomitant perineorrhaphy or not.
This is an emulated pragmatic open-label two-arm trial in patients undergoing native tissue repair surgery for pelvic organ prolapse, in which patients are randomized perioperatively to either concomitant perineorrhaphy or not. The target population is the large group of patients for whom, at the discretion of the surgeon, this intervention is currently an option while not being strictly indicated. The investigators assumed that women were randomly assigned perioperatively to either strategy within levels of baseline co-variables: age, BMI, parity, lung disease, ASA-classification, constipation, hypermobility, prolapse in which vaginal compartment and if surgery is performed on it, year of primary surgery and region. Data was obtained from The Swedish National Quality Register of Gynaecological Surgery (GynOp), the Swedish National Patient Register, the Swedish Medical Birth Register, and the Swedish Cause of Death Register. In order to emulate a target trial, multiple imputation of missing data is followed by controlling for confounding through inverse probability weighting (IPW) in order to estimate the average treatment effect (ATE) in the primary analysis. In the secondary analysis, the primary analysis will be repeated but with overlap weights. Additional analyses: The sample will be re-weighted using IPW to estimate the average treatment effect on the treated (ATT). Restricted mean survival time (RMST) will be calculated at five years of follow-up for the primary outcome. Bias analysis: Mortality during follow up for the primary outcome will be used as a negative control.
Patients with their primary vaginal pelvic organ prolapse surgery registered in the Swedish National Quality Register of Gynaecological Surgery (GynOp).
Exclusion Criteria:
Primary pelvic organ prolapse surgery (no concomitant hysterectomy) with native tissue repair including perineorrhaphy
Procedure: Perineorrhaphy
Primary pelvic organ prolapse surgery (no concomitant hysterectomy) with native tissue repair excluding perineorrhaphy
Procedure: No perineorrhaphy
Concomitant perineorrhaphy
No concomitant perineorrhaphy
Reoperation
Reported as absolute risk difference, with cumulative risks during five years of follow-up estimated using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. Data obtained from the The Swedish National Quality Register of Gynaecological Surgery (GynOp) and the Swedish National Patient Register.
Time frame: 5 years
Symptoms of a vaginal bulge (patient reported outcome)
Absolute risk difference for the outcome at 1 year follow-up with the non-inferiority margin set to 10% of the absolute risk in the comparison group. Data obtained from the The Swedish National Quality Register of Gynaecological Surgery (GynOp).
Time frame: At 1 year
Unsatisfied (patient reported outcome)
Absolute risk difference for the outcome at 1 year follow-up with the non-inferiority margin set to 10% of the absolute risk in the comparison group. Data obtained from the The Swedish National Quality Register of Gynaecological Surgery (GynOp).
Time frame: At 1 year
Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.
Plan to share: No — Data are available from the registry source.
This study is completed, as verified in May 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Lund University