Different Surgical Techniques Used for Prolapse Repair in Elderly Patient

NCT03445442 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: URO-BASE02
• Study Type: observational
• Target: 214
• Locations: 0 countries
• Sites: N/A

Brief Summary

The investigator aimed to compare various pelvic floor repairs in female aged from 70 to 80 years old, to see which procedure in terms of treatment-related complications of SCP, VMR and NTR by comparing the operative and functional outcomes in this patient population.

Conditions

Unrecognized Condition

Keywords

Elderly; Native tissue repair; Pelvic Organ Prolapse; Sacrocolpopexy; Vaginal mesh repair

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

• Post-operative complications

  All complications are recorded, corresponding to Clavien Dindo classification.

  12 months follow-up

Secondary Outcomes (2)

• Anatomical success rate

  12 months follow-up

• Surgical satisfaction

  12 months follow-up

Study Arms (3)

Group 1

Sacrocolpopexy (SCP)

Procedure: SCP

Group 2

Native tissue repair surgery (NTR)

Procedure: NTR

Group 3

Vaginal mesh repair surgery (VMR)

Procedure: VMR

Interventions

SCP PROCEDURE

Sacrocolpopexy (SCP) aims to secure the anterior vaginal wall, the uterus more or less the posterior vaginal wall using polypropylene prostheses and to secure them to the presacral ligament to restore the patient's anatomical features and improve pelvic symptoms

Group 1

NTR PROCEDURE

Native tissue repair surgery (NTR) consist of site-specific surgical repair of the existing defect (anterior and/or posterior) using non-absorbable sutures. Specifically, anterior and/or posterior colporrhaphy for cystocele and rectocele respectively after adequate hydrodissection of the vesicovaginal or rectovaginal space.

Group 2

VMR PROCEDURE

Vaginal mesh repair surgery (VMR) is performed using a single-incision mesh system. A single vertical incision is made in the anterior and/or posterior vaginal wall. A full-thickness dissection is performed laterally and apically to the ischial spine.

Group 3

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 70 Years - 80 Years
• Sex: female
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Older Adult (65+)
• Sampling Method: Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

The study cohort is selected from our institution. The study involves elderly females over 70 years old with advanced pelvic organ prolapse.

You may qualify if:

• Patients with a pelvic organ prolapse
• Patients aged between 70 and 80 years old
• Patients with symptomatic anterior, apical and/or posterior compartment prolapse, stage 2 or greater

You may not qualify if:

• Patients with a previous history of pelvic surgery for a cancer diagnosis are excluded
• Patients with a surgical repair specific to the existing defect site (For group 2)

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice: lead

Related Publications (29)

• Samuelsson EC, Victor FT, Tibblin G, Svardsudd KF. Signs of genital prolapse in a Swedish population of women 20 to 59 years of age and possible related factors. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999 Feb;180(2 Pt 1):299-305. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9378(99)70203-6.

  PMID: 9988790 BACKGROUND

• Gomelsky A, Penson DF, Dmochowski RR. Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgery: the evidence for the repairs. BJU Int. 2011 Jun;107(11):1704-19. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10123.x.

  PMID: 21592280 BACKGROUND

• Williams-Russo P, Sharrock NE, Mattis S, Szatrowski TP, Charlson ME. Cognitive effects after epidural vs general anesthesia in older adults. A randomized trial. JAMA. 1995 Jul 5;274(1):44-50.

  PMID: 7791257 BACKGROUND

• Luber KM, Boero S, Choe JY. The demographics of pelvic floor disorders: current observations and future projections. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Jun;184(7):1496-501; discussion 1501-3. doi: 10.1067/mob.2001.114868.

  PMID: 11408873 BACKGROUND

• Stepp KJ, Barber MD, Yoo EH, Whiteside JL, Paraiso MF, Walters MD. Incidence of perioperative complications of urogynecologic surgery in elderly women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 May;192(5):1630-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.11.026.

  PMID: 15902169 BACKGROUND

• Tabata T, Yamawaki T, Ida M, Nishimura K, Nose Y, Yabana T. Clinical value of dilatation and curettage for abnormal uterine bleeding. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2001 Jan;264(4):174-6. doi: 10.1007/s004040000100.

  PMID: 11205702 BACKGROUND

• Hornemann A, Kamischke A, Luedders DW, Beyer DA, Diedrich K, Bohlmann MK. Advanced age is a risk factor for higher grade perineal lacerations during delivery in nulliparous women. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2010 Jan;281(1):59-64. doi: 10.1007/s00404-009-1063-7. Epub 2009 Mar 31.

  PMID: 19333610 BACKGROUND

• Sabbagh R, Mandron E, Piussan J, Brychaert PE, Tu le M. Long-term anatomical and functional results of laparoscopic promontofixation for pelvic organ prolapse. BJU Int. 2010 Sep;106(6):861-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09173.x. Epub 2010 Jan 19.

  PMID: 20089111 BACKGROUND

• Gerten KA, Markland AD, Lloyd LK, Richter HE. Prolapse and incontinence surgery in older women. J Urol. 2008 Jun;179(6):2111-8. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.01.089.

  PMID: 18423726 BACKGROUND

• Visco AG, Wei JT, McClure LA, Handa VL, Nygaard IE; Pelvic Floor Disorders Network. Effects of examination technique modifications on pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) results. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2003 Jun;14(2):136-40. doi: 10.1007/s00192-002-1030-3. Epub 2003 Mar 28.

  PMID: 12851759 BACKGROUND

• Giuly J, Cravello L, D'Ercole C, Roger V, Porcu G, Blanc B. [Richter's spinofixation in vaginal prolapse]. Chirurgie. 1997;122(7):430-4. French.

  PMID: 9588065 BACKGROUND

• Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae.

  PMID: 15273542 BACKGROUND

• Murphy M, Sternschuss G, Haff R, van Raalte H, Saltz S, Lucente V. Quality of life and surgical satisfaction after vaginal reconstructive vs obliterative surgery for the treatment of advanced pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008 May;198(5):573.e1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.12.036.

  PMID: 18455537 BACKGROUND

• King SW, Jefferis H, Jackson S, Marfin AG, Price N. Laparoscopic uterovaginal prolapse surgery in the elderly: feasibility and outcomes. Gynecol Surg. 2017;14(1):2. doi: 10.1186/s10397-017-1000-x. Epub 2017 Apr 11.

  PMID: 28479877 BACKGROUND

• Sung VW, Weitzen S, Sokol ER, Rardin CR, Myers DL. Effect of patient age on increasing morbidity and mortality following urogynecologic surgery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006 May;194(5):1411-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2006.01.050.

  PMID: 16647926 BACKGROUND

• Leung JM, Dzankic S. Relative importance of preoperative health status versus intraoperative factors in predicting postoperative adverse outcomes in geriatric surgical patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001 Aug;49(8):1080-5. doi: 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2001.49212.x.

  PMID: 11555070 BACKGROUND

• Maher C, Feiner B, Baessler K, Christmann-Schmid C, Haya N, Brown J. Surgery for women with apical vaginal prolapse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Oct 1;10(10):CD012376. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012376.

  PMID: 27696355 BACKGROUND

• Rodgers A, Walker N, Schug S, McKee A, Kehlet H, van Zundert A, Sage D, Futter M, Saville G, Clark T, MacMahon S. Reduction of postoperative mortality and morbidity with epidural or spinal anaesthesia: results from overview of randomised trials. BMJ. 2000 Dec 16;321(7275):1493. doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7275.1493.

  PMID: 11118174 BACKGROUND

• Greer JA, Northington GM, Harvie HS, Segal S, Johnson JC, Arya LA. Functional status and postoperative morbidity in older women with prolapse. J Urol. 2013 Sep;190(3):948-52. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2013.03.004. Epub 2013 Mar 6.

  PMID: 23473899 BACKGROUND

• Ganatra AM, Rozet F, Sanchez-Salas R, Barret E, Galiano M, Cathelineau X, Vallancien G. The current status of laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy: a review. Eur Urol. 2009 May;55(5):1089-103. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.01.048. Epub 2009 Feb 4.

  PMID: 19201521 BACKGROUND

• Keys T, Campeau L, Badlani G. Synthetic mesh in the surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse: current status and future directions. Urology. 2012 Aug;80(2):237-43. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2012.04.008. Epub 2012 May 23.

  PMID: 22626575 BACKGROUND

• Belot F, Collinet P, Debodinance P, Ha Duc E, Lucot JP, Cosson M. [Risk factors for prosthesis exposure in treatment of genital prolapse via the vaginal approach]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2005 Dec;33(12):970-4. doi: 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2005.10.023. French.

  PMID: 16324871 BACKGROUND

• Maher CF, Feiner B, DeCuyper EM, Nichlos CJ, Hickey KV, O'Rourke P. Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy versus total vaginal mesh for vaginal vault prolapse: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Apr;204(4):360.e1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.11.016.

  PMID: 21306698 BACKGROUND

• Agarwala N, Hasiak N, Shade M. Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy with Gynemesh as graft material--experience and results. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2007 Sep-Oct;14(5):577-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2007.03.005.

  PMID: 17848318 BACKGROUND

• Su TH, Lau HH, Huang WC, Hsieh CH, Chang RC, Su CH. Single-incision mesh repair versus traditional native tissue repair for pelvic organ prolapse: results of a cohort study. Int Urogynecol J. 2014 Jul;25(7):901-8. doi: 10.1007/s00192-013-2294-5. Epub 2014 Jan 28.

  PMID: 24469775 BACKGROUND

• Nieminen K, Hiltunen R, Takala T, Heiskanen E, Merikari M, Niemi K, Heinonen PK. Outcomes after anterior vaginal wall repair with mesh: a randomized, controlled trial with a 3 year follow-up. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Sep;203(3):235.e1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.03.030. Epub 2010 May 21.

  PMID: 20494332 BACKGROUND

• Moore RD, Miklos JR. Vaginal repair of cystocele with anterior wall mesh via transobturator route: efficacy and complications with up to 3-year followup. Adv Urol. 2009;2009:743831. doi: 10.1155/2009/743831. Epub 2009 Aug 24.

  PMID: 19710939 BACKGROUND

• Lee U, Wolff EM, Kobashi KC. Native tissue repairs in anterior vaginal prolapse surgery: examining definitions of surgical success in the mesh era. Curr Opin Urol. 2012 Jul;22(4):265-70. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e32835459bb.

  PMID: 22617056 BACKGROUND

• Tibi B, Vincens E, Durand M, Bentellis I, Salet-Lizee D, Kane A, Gadonneix P, Severac F, Ahallal Y, Chevallier D, Villet R. Comparison of different surgical techniques for pelvic floor repair in elderly women: a multi-institutional study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019 Apr;299(4):1007-1013. doi: 10.1007/s00404-019-05076-1. Epub 2019 Feb 20.

  PMID: 30788571 DERIVED

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Prolapse; Pathological Conditions, Anatomical; Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms

Study Design

• Study Type: observational
• Observational Model: COHORT
• Time Perspective: RETROSPECTIVE
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: February 12, 2018
• First Posted: February 26, 2018
• Study Start: January 1, 2011
• Primary Completion: December 1, 2012
• Study Completion: April 5, 2017
• Last Updated: March 22, 2018

Record last verified: 2018-02

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share