Mesh Repair of Anterior Vaginal Wall Prolapse
- Full Text View
- Tabular View
- No Study Results Posted
- Disclaimer
- How to Read a Study Record
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to determine whether reenforcement with polypropylen mesh compared with traditional anterior colporrhaphy for anterior vaginal wall prolapse results in fewer recurrences.
| Condition | Intervention | Phase |
|---|---|---|
|
Anterior Vaginal Wall Prolapse |
Device: Low-weight prolypropylene mesh |
Phase 3 |
| Study Type: | Interventional |
| Study Design: | Allocation: Randomized Endpoint Classification: Efficacy Study Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment Masking: Open Label Primary Purpose: Treatment |
| Official Title: | Low-Weight Polypropylene Mesh for Anterior Vaginal Wall Prolapse: A Prospective Randomized Study |
- Recurrence of anterior vaginal wall prolapse
- Postvoidal residual urine
- Symptom resolution
- Complications
| Estimated Enrollment: | 202 |
| Study Start Date: | April 2003 |
| Estimated Study Completion Date: | May 2008 |
Anterior vaginal wall prolapse is the most common type of pelvic organ prolapse in postmenopausal women. This anatomic defect has traditionally been repaired with anterior colporrhaphy plication, a series of interrupted stitches being the main surgical component. The procedure is associated with a high recurrence rate, up to 32 % even after using paravaginal repair along with anterior colporrhaphy.It has been sought to resolve the problem of recurrence using artificial mesh as in the repair of abdominal hernias.
Comparison: Anterior vaginal wall repair with or without reinforcement with polypropylene mesh were compared in a prospective randomized study
Eligibility| Ages Eligible for Study: | 50 Years and older |
| Genders Eligible for Study: | Female |
| Accepts Healthy Volunteers: | No |
Inclusion Criteria:
- Postmenopausal women with symptomatic anterior vaginal wall prolapse to the hymen or beyond when under strain and referred for reconstructive pelvic surgery
Exclusion Criteria:
- an apical defect indicating concomitant vaginal fixation, or stress urinary incontinence necessitating surgery, or her main symptomatic prolapse component was in the posterior vaginal wall.
Contacts and Locations| Finland | |
| Tampere University Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology | |
| Tampere, Finland, 33521 | |
| Principal Investigator: | Kari Nieminen | Tampere University Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology |
More Information
No publications provided by University of Tampere
Additional publications automatically indexed to this study by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number):
| ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: | NCT00420225 History of Changes |
| Other Study ID Numbers: | Tampere University Hospital |
| Study First Received: | January 9, 2007 |
| Last Updated: | January 9, 2007 |
| Health Authority: | Finland: TEO |
Keywords provided by University of Tampere:
|
Cystocele surgery mesh genital prolapse |
Additional relevant MeSH terms:
|
Prolapse Pathological Conditions, Anatomical |
ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on May 21, 2013