NCT04551859

Brief Summary

The primary objective of this study is to demonstrate the feasibility of using a Finite Element model of pelvic organs by evaluating the concordance of pelvic organ mobility measurements performed by this mechanical model compared to the observations on the post-operative pelvic MRI in patients undergoing a sacrospinofixation surgery

Trial Health

35
At Risk

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Trial has exceeded expected completion date
Enrollment
41

participants targeted

Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Oct 2020

Status
unknown

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

September 7, 2020

Completed
9 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

September 16, 2020

Completed
15 days until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

October 1, 2020

Completed
1 year until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

October 1, 2021

Completed
1 month until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

November 1, 2021

Completed
Last Updated

September 16, 2020

Status Verified

August 1, 2020

Enrollment Period

1 year

First QC Date

September 7, 2020

Last Update Submit

September 15, 2020

Conditions

Keywords

SacrospinofixationProlapseRichterVaginal vaultSacrospinous ligament fixation

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Concordance of mobility measurements of points C, Ba and Bp between the FE model and the dynamic MRI after SSF

    Concordance of mobility measurements of the 3 points C, Ba, Bp during the defecation sequence, between the Finite Elements (FE) model and the dynamic pelvic floor MRI after sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSF)

    6 months after surgery

Secondary Outcomes (4)

  • Concordance of mobility measurements of points Aa and Ap between the FE model and the dynamic MRI after SSF

    6 months after surgery

  • Comparison of the pelvic organ mobility before and after surgery

    6 months after surgery

  • Elasticity study of the vaginal tissue (Lille)

    after surgery (day 0)

  • Concordance of mobility measurements between FE model enhanced by the vaginal tissue analysis and the dynamic MRI after SSF

    6 months after surgery

Study Arms (1)

Sacrospinofixation

OTHER

After accepting the surgeon's proposal to perform a sacrospinofixation to treat the pelvic organ prolapse, participation in this study will be proposed to the patient. It will not change the management or the course of the surgery

Other: Dynamic Pelvic Floor MRI

Interventions

6 months after surgery, a Dynamic Pelvic Floor MRI is performed

Sacrospinofixation

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years - 80 Years
Sexfemale
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Women aged 18 to 80
  • With at least a grade II apical prolapse according to the POP-Q classification
  • Treated with a sacrospinous ligament fixation (SSF) by the vaginal route

You may not qualify if:

  • History of abdominal, pelvic, vaginal or vulvar surgery except hysterectomy
  • Association of another POP or urinary incontinence surgery (subvesical plication, levator myorrhaphy, plication of anterior rectal wall, perineorrhaphy ...)
  • MRI contraindication
  • Legal incapacity or limited legal capacity
  • Subject unlikely to cooperate with the study

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Related Publications (9)

  • Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Apr;89(4):501-6. doi: 10.1016/S0029-7844(97)00058-6.

    PMID: 9083302BACKGROUND
  • de Tayrac R, Letouzey V, Costa P, Haab F, Delmas V. [Treatment of uterine prolapse and vaginal vault by vaginal route]. Prog Urol. 2009 Dec;19(13):1074-9. doi: 10.1016/j.purol.2009.09.025. Epub 2009 Oct 21. French.

    PMID: 19969278BACKGROUND
  • Cosson M, Rubod C, Vallet A, Witz JF, Dubois P, Brieu M. Simulation of normal pelvic mobilities in building an MRI-validated biomechanical model. Int Urogynecol J. 2013 Jan;24(1):105-12. doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1842-8. Epub 2012 Jun 16.

    PMID: 22707008BACKGROUND
  • Lamblin G, Mayeur O, Giraudet G, Jean Dit Gautier E, Chene G, Brieu M, Rubod C, Cosson M. Pathophysiological aspects of cystocele with a 3D finite elements model. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2016 Nov;294(5):983-989. doi: 10.1007/s00404-016-4150-6. Epub 2016 Jul 11.

    PMID: 27402504BACKGROUND
  • Jeanditgautier E, Mayeur O, Brieu M, Lamblin G, Rubod C, Cosson M. Mobility and stress analysis of different surgical simulations during a sacral colpopexy, using a finite element model of the pelvic system. Int Urogynecol J. 2016 Jun;27(6):951-7. doi: 10.1007/s00192-015-2917-0. Epub 2016 Jan 11.

    PMID: 26755057BACKGROUND
  • Cosson M, Rubod C, Vallet A, Witz JF, Brieu M. [Biomechanical modeling of pelvic organ mobility: towards personalized medicine]. Bull Acad Natl Med. 2011 Nov;195(8):1869-83; discussion 1883. French.

    PMID: 22844748BACKGROUND
  • Estrade JP, Agostini A, Roger V, Dallay D, Blanc B, Cravello L. [Posthysterectomy prolapse: results of sacrospinous ligament fixation]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2005 Sep;34(5):481-7. doi: 10.1016/s0368-2315(05)82856-x. French.

    PMID: 16142139BACKGROUND
  • 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: 27696355BACKGROUND
  • Lallemant M, Shimojyo AA, Mayeur O, Ramanah R, Rubod C, Kerbage Y, Cosson M. Mobility analysis of a posterior sacrospinous fixation using a finite element model of the pelvic system. PLoS One. 2024 Mar 21;19(3):e0299012. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299012. eCollection 2024.

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Prolapse

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Pathological Conditions, AnatomicalPathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms

Central Study Contacts

Michel Cosson, Pr

CONTACT

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
NA
Masking
NONE
Purpose
OTHER
Intervention Model
SINGLE GROUP
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

September 7, 2020

First Posted

September 16, 2020

Study Start

October 1, 2020

Primary Completion

October 1, 2021

Study Completion

November 1, 2021

Last Updated

September 16, 2020

Record last verified: 2020-08