The main objective of the study is to compare subjective efficacy of trans vaginal mesh and laparoscopic colposakropexy (CSP) in women with an apical prolapse. The CSP group is further divided into two sub-groups; one where the mesh fixation is only at the apical part of the vagina, and another where the fixation is also extended to the levator plane.
The secondary outcomes are safety (peri- and post-surgery complications, pain, erosion), objective efficacy (simplified POP-Q), and re-operation rate. Subjective outcome also includes the assessment of sexual satisfaction. Cost-effectiveness is studied by comparing both direct costs and QALYs.
Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is defined as an anatomical support defect of the pelvic viscera. Women's POP is the descent of uterus or vaginal apex with or without concomitant descent of the anterior (cystocele) or posterior (rectocele) vaginal wall. It is estimated that the lifetime risk of POP surgery in women is approximately 10-13%, the incidence peak being 20-30 years after the first delivery, which is also the most important risk factor for POP. Other risk factors include previous hysterectomy, obesity and genetic factors.
The typical POP symptoms are a feeling of bulge, accompanied with urinary incontinence, defecation problems, and sexual dissatisfaction. First line treatments are conservative, but if they fail, surgery is indicated.
Native tissue repair of the anterior and / or posterior vaginal wall (colporrhaphy anterior / posterior) is commonly the first-line operation. The possible concomitant apical prolapse needs to be suspended which is typically done by either by performing a hysterectomy with shortening and suspension of the sacrouterine ligaments, or by amputation of the cervix with suspension of the cardinale and sacrouterine ligaments (Manchester operation). An unsuspended apical defect will double the relapse rate (20 vs 11%). In most of the apical recurrences mesh is used to achieve sufficient support. The re-operation rate of any POP in Finland is 10.8% .
In mesh operations the apex can be suspended either transvaginally (TVM) by anchoring the mesh to the sacrospinosus ligaments, or by doing a colposacropexy (CSP) where the mesh is attached to the sacrum, mostly via laparoscopy. The CSP techniques vary e.g. the mesh can be attached only apically or also to the levator plane. If needed, colporrhaphies can be done concomitantly.
The use of TVM has decreased due to the FDA-warnings and litigations concerning mainly the risks of erosion and pain. This has lead to withdrawals of mesh products, despite well-conducted clinical studies indicating that in well-chosen women light-weight small TVM is not associated with major complications. Currently, no TVM with good quality clinical data is available. Traditionally, CSP has been considered safer than TVM in regard of erosions and pain, but the data is scarce. Furthermore, CSP has a longer learning-curve and is a more time-consuming operation than TVM, whereas hospital stay is shorter.
To the investigators knowledge, there is only one published study where TVM and CSP has been compared, and in that study a large "covering" TVM was used which was thereafter withdrawn from the market. In addition,in most studies, operation techniques, especially with CSP are not standardized. Therefore, further head-to-head comparisons are needed. The investigators propose a study comparing efficacy and safety when using the TVM or CSP approach in women with an apical defect. The investigators will also evaluate whether, in CSP, apical fixation alone is sufficient, or whether levator plane fixation provide a better outcome.
Study objective:
The main objective of the study is to compare subjective efficacy (PFDI-20, question nro 3; feeling of bulge) between TVM and CSP in women with an apical prolapse. The CSP group is further divided into two sub-groups; one where the mesh fixation is only at the apical part of the vagina, and another where the fixation is also extended to the levator plane.
The secondary outcomes are safety (peri- and post-surgery complications, pain, erosion), objective efficacy (simplified POP-Q), and re-operation rate. Subjective outcome also includes the assessment of sexual satisfaction. Cost-effectiveness is studied by comparing both direct costs and QALYs.
Inclusion criteria:
Age over 18 years and capability to understand the study protocol either in Finnish or Swedish.
Objectively diagnosed symptomatic apical prolapse (leading apical prolapse (points C/D -2) and a history of previous POP operation including hysterectomy.
No need for any other concomitant operations except colporrhaphies and possible prophylactic salpingo-oophorectomy in CSP groups
Exclusion criteria:
A history of previous serious or prolonged pain after any operation. Regular use of systemic corticosteroid medication. Incapability to understand the study protocol.
Groups, procedures, and randomization:
The participants are randomized into three groups:
In all groups concomitant colporrhaphies can be conducted. Anterior or posterior colporraphy is done in the following fashion: a 0,25% lidocaine solution containing adrenaline is injected under the anterior or posterior vaginal wall to provide haemostasis and hydrodissection. The vaginal wall is incised and the fascia is separated from the vaginal epithelium using a combination of sharp and blunt dissection. The fascia is plicated using a running 3-0 PDS suture in two layers. Excess vaginal epithelium is excised and the vaginal epithelium is closed with a running 3-0 Vicryl suture.
All the operators have conducted at least ten surgeries with the mesh before taking part into the study.
Power calculation:
The primary outcome is subjective success; defined as the absence of vaginal bulge, i.e. negative response to PDFI-20, question 3 at one-year following the surgery. Previous literature show various results. Altman et al (NEJM 2011) described that this outcome was achieved in 61% of women following a transvaginal mesh surgery. A prospective study by Duraes et al (2019) and Wei et al described an even higher success of 92% to 94%. Laparoscopic CSP has shown a subjective success rate of 91% to 94%. Based on these findings we assumed that the subjective success would be 80% following laparoscopic CSP and 75% following a TVM. The TVM operation is the study population that is compared to the laparoscopic CSP performed in two different technique (see methods).
The statistical power is based on a non-inferiority assumption with a binary outcome. On the basis of previous studies we estimated that 96 patients are needed in each group for 80% power to detect a 20% difference in the primary outcome measure, with a two-tailed error of 1%.
A drop-out ratio of 10% is assumed and 106 women are needed in each group (transvaginal mesh, laparoscopic colposacropexy type A and laparoscopic colposarcopexy type B). Thus, a total of 318 women are planned to be randomized for the study.
Subjective outcome:
Symptom spesific: Pelvic floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20), Pelvic floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ), Pelvic Organ Prolapse / Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12) Overall quality of life: 15D and RAND-36 questionnaires Pain is evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS; 0-10) scale. The questionnaires are filled preoperatively, and after 6 months, 12 months, and 5 years.
Objective outcome:
Evaluation of the leading part of the apical point, and anterior and posterior vaginal walls (cm in relation to the hymen level) preoperatively, and after 6 months, 12 months, and 5 years.
Peri- and postoperative (both short- and long-term) complications and possible re-operations are recorded and classified according to the Claviend-Dindo.
Operation time, hospital stay, length of sick leave and costs of medications for operation and possible complications are recorded.
Cost-effectiveness:
Direct and indirect costs cover length of operation time, length of hospital stay, needed pain medication at home, other needed medication, length of sick leave, costs of possible further outpatient department visits or hospital stay with possible re-operations.
QALY calculations are based on 15D and RAND-36 questionnaires.
Condition | Vaginal Vault Prolapse |
---|---|
Treatment | TVM, Colposacropexy |
Clinical Study Identifier | NCT04478747 |
Sponsor | Helsinki University Central Hospital |
Last Modified on | 25 February 2021 |
,
You have contacted , on
Your message has been sent to the study team at ,
You are contacting
Primary Contact
Additional screening procedures may be conducted by the study team before you can be confirmed eligible to participate.
Learn moreIf you are confirmed eligible after full screening, you will be required to understand and sign the informed consent if you decide to enroll in the study. Once enrolled you may be asked to make scheduled visits over a period of time.
Learn moreComplete your scheduled study participation activities and then you are done. You may receive summary of study results if provided by the sponsor.
Learn moreEvery year hundreds of thousands of volunteers step forward to participate in research. Sign up as a volunteer and receive email notifications when clinical trials are posted in the medical category of interest to you.
Sign up as volunteer
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur, adipisicing elit. Ipsa vel nobis alias. Quae eveniet velit voluptate quo doloribus maxime et dicta in sequi, corporis quod. Ea, dolor eius? Dolore, vel!
No annotations made yet
Congrats! You have your own personal workspace now.