The Use of Avaulta for Anterior Repair
NCT00918099 · Status: UNKNOWN · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 130
Last updated 2009-06-11
Summary
Summary:
Vaginal prolapse is a well-known disease and is observed in approximately 11% of all postmenopausal women and tending to increase with age. Consequently, many surgical procedures have been developed in order to ensure sufficient support for the bladder, rectum or vaginal vault depending on the site of the defect. However, many procedures are associated with a high recurrence rate up to 40 % even within one to two years after the surgical procedure.
Due to the high recurrence rate new methods include the use of mesh, either biologically or synthetic. The latter is a permanent implant and therefore theoretically may result in a long-lasting anatomically correct position of the prolapse.
Although the recurrence rate may be lower using a mesh such surgical procedures may be associated with adverse events such as erosions of the vaginal mucosa. Others have observed shrinkage of the vaginal mucosa. However, in these studies large prolene mesh have been used. In contrast the recurrence rate is lowered up to 25%.
The above-mentioned advantage of synthetic mesh is however, mostly based on few non-randomised studies. The investigators therefore find it of importance to evaluate whether a surgical procedure using a mesh implant is superior to conventional surgical techniques. The present study is a clinical controlled study where patients with anterior vaginal prolapse are randomised to either a mesh technique or a standard anterior procedure.
The present study includes only two more visits at the outpatient clinic after the surgical procedure. Furthermore the patients have to fulfil questionnaires regarding urinary and faecal leakage and sexual habits.
Any participation in the study is totally voluntary and the patient may at any time withdraw herself. In any case the patient will receive the investigators' standard treatment.
Conditions
- Vaginal Prolapse
Interventions
- PROCEDURE
-
Avaulta mesh
Insertion of a mesh vs conventional repair
- PROCEDURE
-
Anterior repair
Conventional repair
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
Zealand University Hospital
lead OTHER
Study Design
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Masking
- DOUBLE
- Model
- SINGLE_GROUP
Eligibility
- Min Age
- 55 Years
- Sex
- FEMALE
- Healthy Volunteers
- No
Timeline & Regulatory
- Start
- 2008-10-31
- Primary Completion
- 2010-07-31
- Completion
- 2010-07-31
Countries
- Denmark
Study Locations
More Related Trials
-
An Institutional Audit of the Short Term Complications and Long Term Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy for Vault/cervical Prolapse.
NCT04378400 ·Status: ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION
-
Efficacy Study of Vaginal Mesh for Anterior Prolapse
NCT00557882 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Performance of Tension Free Vaginal Mesh (Prolift) Versus Conventional Vaginal Prolapse Surgery in Recurrent Prolapse.
NCT00372190 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Mesh Repair of Anterior Vaginal Wall Prolapse
NCT00420225 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE3
-
Single Incision Transvaginal Mesh in Treatment of Posterior Vaginal Wall Prolapse
NCT02092623 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Anterior Vaginal Wall Reconstruction
NCT00571350 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE1/PHASE2
-
Native Tissue Repair in Pelvic Organ Prolapse -Long-term Results and Risk of Re-operation
NCT06744972 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Comparison of Two Vaginal Mesh Kits in the Management of Vaginal Prolapse
NCT03187574 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Vaginal Native Tissues Repair for Pelvic Organ Prolapse
NCT03875989 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
The ELEGANT Trial: Elevate Transvaginal Mesh vs. Anterior Colporrhaphy
NCT01497171 ·Status: TERMINATED ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Smartmesh Technology in Pelvic Floor Repair Procedures
NCT03098641 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Restorelle® Y Mesh vs. Vertessa® Lite Y Mesh for Laparoscopic and Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy
NCT03681223 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison of Single Versus Multicenter Outcomes for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair Using a Mesh-capturing Device
NCT03077490 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Prospective Randomized Study to Compare Results of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair With One Versus Two Vaginal Meshes
NCT02536001 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Comparative Study of Mesh Versus No Mesh in Prolapse Surgery
NCT00153257 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Efficacy Study of Vaginal Mesh for Prolapse
NCT00475540 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Restorelle® Mesh Versus Native Tissue Repair for Prolapse
NCT02162615 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy for Vaginal Prolapse
NCT00551993 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Safety Study of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair Using Transvaginal Mesh
NCT00402844 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE2/PHASE3
-
Sacrocolpopexy Versus Vaginal Mesh Procedure for Pelvic Prolapse
NCT01097200 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Flat Polypropylene Mesh in the Treatment of Uterine and Recurrent or Advanced Pelvic Organ Prolapse
NCT06225375 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: PHASE1/PHASE2
-
Comparison of 2 Lightweight Y-meshes After Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy
NCT02248935 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Real-Life Use of Transabdominal Restorelle® Meshes in Apical Prolapse Repair
NCT06296316 ·Status: TERMINATED
-
Intra-operative Adverse Events During Laparoscopic Ventral Mesh Rectopexy
NCT02870192 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Multicenter Ventral Mesh Rectopexy Registry Collaborative
NCT05918367 ·Status: RECRUITING