MedPath

Transvaginal Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Laparoscopic Uterine Lateral Suspension

Recruiting
Conditions
Pelvic Organ Prolapse
Uterine Prolapse
Interventions
Procedure: Laparoscopic uterine lateral suspension
Procedure: Transvaginal sacrospinous fixation
Registration Number
NCT05586984
Lead Sponsor
National Cheng-Kung University Hospital
Brief Summary

Transvaginal or transabdominal surgeries are current choices of uterus-preserving surgeries for pelvic organ prolapse.

Laparoscopic lateral uterine suspension, a modified surgical approach of uterine suspension from bilateral abdominal wall fascia, performed with expected safety and simplicity of surgery besides advantages including small wound incision and fast recovery in laparoscopic surgeries. This trial aim to discuss the therapeutic efficacy, long term safety, and adverse events of laparoscopic lateral uterine suspension and compare with the conventional transvaginal sacrospinous ligament fixation with native tissue repair.

Detailed Description

Pelvic organ prolapse can be treated either conservatively or surgically. Patients who are unsatisfied with conservative treatment or with severe symptoms often seek for surgical intervention. Transvaginal or transabdominal surgeries are current choices of uterus-preserving surgeries for pelvic organ prolapse. Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy is the current trend for laparoscopic surgery, with small incisional wound, fast recovery, and low recurrence rate as advantages. However, laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy is often regarded as time consuming and ous sometimes hazard given the complexity of surgical technique and the anatomy of the presacral region. Few cases with severe complications such as vascular injuries, sacral nerve root injuries, and diskitis had been reported with laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy in previous studies.

Laparoscopic lateral uterine suspension, a modified surgical approach of uterine suspension from bilateral abdominal wall fascia, is therefore proposed in our study. The most significant benefits of this novel approach include safety and simplicity of surgery besides advantages including small wound incision and fast recovery in laparoscopic surgeries. This trial aim to discuss the therapeutic efficacy of laparoscopic lateral uterine suspension and compare with the transvaginal sacrospinous ligament fixation with native tissue repair. Other results include safety and adverse events of laparoscopic lateral uterine suspension in long term follow up.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
RECRUITING
Sex
Female
Target Recruitment
90
Inclusion Criteria
  • older than 21 years old.
  • uterine prolapse stage 2 at least, defined by C point distal to -1cm by POP-Q system.
  • patients willing to receive a uterine-preserving surgery for pelvic organ prolapse, and is suitable for anesthesia after evaluation.
  • patients who had or had not received conservative treatments for pelvic organ prolapse.
  • patients able and willing to finish the questionnaire evaluation.
Exclusion Criteria
  • patient who had received a previous hysterectomy, or is planning on concomitant hysterectomy in the surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.
  • patient who had received a previous surgery for pelvic organ prolapse.
  • patient with history of adverse events following a synthetic mesh.
  • patients with chronic or acute pelvic pain.
  • patients who had received abdominal or pelvic irradiation.
  • patients who cannot receive either surgery due to comorbidity.
  • patients pregnant or with future plan of pregnancy.
  • patients with vaginal length less than 5cm.

Study & Design

Study Type
OBSERVATIONAL
Study Design
Not specified
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
Laparoscopic uterine lateral suspensionLaparoscopic uterine lateral suspensionLaparoscopic uterine lateral suspension for apical prolapse. Concomitant anterior and posterior colporrhaphy may be performed.
Transvaginal sacrospinous fixationTransvaginal sacrospinous fixationUterus-preserving transvaginal sacrospinous fixation for apical prolapse. Concomitant anterior and posterior colporrhaphy may be performed.
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Recurrence5 years

Composite outcome of subjective and objective recurrence of uterine prolapse.

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Sexual function outcome5 years

Comparison of sexual function by Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI).

Urodynamic outcome6 months

Comparison of post residual urine amount, uroflowmetry, and 1-hour pad test.

Anatomical outcome5 years

Comparison of total vaginal length (TVL), Ba, Bp points defined by POP-Q system.

Functional outcome5 years

Comparison of urination and defecation functions by Pelvic floor disability index-20 (PFDI-20).

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

National Cheng Kung University Hospital

🇨🇳

Tainan, Taiwan

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath