Complications Associated With Promontofixation for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Comparing Robot Assisted Laparoscopic and Non-robot Assisted Laparoscopic Surgical Procedures
NCT01320215 · Status: COMPLETED · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 365
Last updated 2025-12-04
Summary
The primary objective of this study is to compare 30-day complication rates associated with promontofixation for pelvic organ prolapse performed via a robot-assisted laparoscopic technique versus a non-robot-assisted laparoscopic technique. Secondary objectives include comparing technical data, anatomical correction, prolapse recurrence, incontinence, quality of life and medico-economic data between the two techniques.
The patient diary did not allow the collection of sufficiently precise data to meet the secondary medico-economic objective of the study. Access to data from the National Health Data System (SDNS), which was not available at the time of the initial drafting of this protocol, now makes it possible to obtain a complete picture of patients' health care consumption. We propose, therefore, to extract data from the SNIIRAM via the SNDS (matching of patients' NIR to their health care consumption) in order to retrieve and accurately estimate the cost of follow-up.
Conditions
- Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Interventions
- PROCEDURE
-
Robot-assisted promontofixation
Sacrohysteropexy with robotic assistance (da Vinci robot)
- PROCEDURE
-
Non-robot assisted promontofixation
Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy, without robot assistance
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nīmes
lead OTHER
Principal Investigators
-
Stéphane Droupy, MD PhD · Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nîmes
Study Design
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Model
- PARALLEL
Eligibility
- Min Age
- 18 Years
- Sex
- FEMALE
- Healthy Volunteers
- No
Timeline & Regulatory
- Start
- 2011-06-22
- Primary Completion
- 2022-01-25
- Completion
- 2022-01-25
Countries
- France
Study Locations
More Related Trials
-
SCP vs HUSLS for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair
NCT02800512 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Indwelling vs Immediate Removal of Foley Catheter After Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy: a Prospective Study
NCT02765893 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Trial Comparing Laparoscopic Vs Robotic-assisted Colposacropexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair
NCT02852512 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Laparoscopic/Robotic-assisted Hysteropexy Versus Vaginal Hysterectomy for the Treatment of Uterovaginal Prolapse
NCT02877407 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Vaginal Uphold Hysteropexy and Laparoscopic Sacral Hysteropexy for the Treatment of Uterovaginal Pelvic Organ Prolapse
NCT01377142 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Apical Suspension Repair for Vault Prolapse In a Three-Arm Randomized Trial Design
NCT02676973 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Laparoscopic Surgery in Elderly Patients
NCT03095716 ·Status: UNKNOWN
-
Randomized,Multicentric Study to Treat Prolapse After Hysterectomy With Amreich Procedure or Total Prolift Procedure
NCT00572702 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison of Laparoscopic to Vaginal Surgical Repair for Uterine Prolapse
NCT01594372 ·Status: TERMINATED ·Phase: NA
-
Compare Sacrospinous Fixation Versus High Uterosacral Ligament Fixation for Uterus Vaginal Prolapse III/IV
NCT01347021 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE4
-
Difference in Pain, Quality of Life Following Vaginal Hysterectomy With Vaginal Reconstruction Versus Robotic Colpopexy?
NCT02049996 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension With Mesh & Sacrocervicopexy for the Treatment of Uterine Prolapse
NCT03421457 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Patient-Centered Outcomes in the Surgical Treatment of Uterovaginal Prolapse
NCT05063331 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Intraoperative Costs and Patient Perceptions in Sacrocolpopexy for Prolapse
NCT04179955 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
-
Uterosacral Ligament Suspension vs Robotic Sacrocolpopexy
NCT02741830 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
A Randomized Controlled Trail of Uterosacral Ligament Suspension in the Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse
NCT06418438 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Follow-up Study After Manchester Operation for Pelvic Organ Prolapse
NCT02246387 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Effectiveness of Perineorrhaphy in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Surgery
NCT07006129 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Abdominal Colpopexy: Comparison of Endoscopic Surgical Strategies
NCT01124916 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Vaginal Hysterectomy vs Supracervical Hysterectomy at the Time of Sacrocolpopexy
NCT04797585 ·Status: TERMINATED ·Phase: NA
-
Cost-effectiveness Comparison Between Vaginal Versus Robotic Mesh Surgery for Apical Prolapse: Prospective, Cohort Study
NCT03878056 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Posterior Mesh Fixation at the Levator Ani Level in Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse
NCT07194343 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Robotic Urogynecological Surgery: Hospital Stay and Perioperative Complications
NCT01033786 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Effectiveness of Laparoscopic Lateral Suspension With or Without Hysterectomy in Pelvic Organ Prolapse
NCT07094815 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
Efficacy/Safety of Urogynecology Synthetic Mesh Surgery
NCT05682989 ·Status: RECRUITING