MedTrace Logo

Comparison of Mesh-Based and Mesh-Free Laparoscopic Pectopexy in Uterus-Preserving Surgery for Apical Prolapse

NCT07080957 · Status: COMPLETED · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 81

Last updated 2025-08-05

No results posted yet for this study

Summary

This retrospective cohort study compares anatomical and functional outcomes of mesh-based and mesh-free laparoscopic uterus-preserving pectopexy in women with apical pelvic organ prolapse. A total of 81 patients were included between 2021 and 2024 (mesh-based: 41, mesh-free: 40). Key outcomes assessed included operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, anatomical correction (POP-Q), sexual function (PISQ-12), and complications. Both techniques significantly improved prolapse and sexual function. Mesh-based pectopexy offered superior apical and posterior support, while mesh-free pectopexy was associated with longer vaginal length and longer operative time. Complication and recurrence rates were low and similar across groups. The findings suggest that both techniques are effective, and surgical approach should be tailored to patient preference and clinical context.

Conditions

  • Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Interventions

PROCEDURE

Mesh-free laparoscopic uterus-preserving pectopexy

Laparoscopic pectopexy without synthetic mesh was performed by utilizing native tissue fixation techniques. The uterus was suspended to the iliopectineal ligaments using permanent sutures without mesh implantation. The procedure aimed to provide apical support and avoid mesh-related complications. Postoperative follow-up included assessments of anatomical correction, functional recovery, and patient satisfaction.

PROCEDURE

Mesh-based laparoscopic uterus-preserving pectopexy

Laparoscopic pectopexy was performed using a synthetic mesh to provide apical support while preserving the uterus. The mesh was bilaterally fixed to the iliopectineal (Cooper's) ligaments, and the uterus was suspended in a tension-free manner. This technique is designed to restore pelvic anatomy and improve symptoms of prolapse. Patients were followed postoperatively to assess anatomical success, complications, and functional outcomes.

Sponsors & Collaborators

  • Havva Betül Bacak

    lead OTHER_GOV

Principal Investigators

  • enes serhat coşkun, md · University of Health Sciences, Gaziosmanpaşa Training and Research Hospital

Study Design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Model
PARALLEL

Eligibility

Min Age
18 Years
Max Age
70 Years
Sex
FEMALE
Healthy Volunteers
No

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2025-04-16
Primary Completion
2025-07-14
Completion
2025-07-14

Countries

  • Turkey (Türkiye)

Study Locations

More Related Trials

Read the full study record

This page highlights key information. For complete eligibility criteria, study locations, investigator contacts, and the full protocol, visit the original record on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View NCT07080957 on ClinicalTrials.gov