Laparoscopic Burch Colposuspension Versus Modified Burch Colposuspension
Not Applicable
Recruiting
- Conditions
- Stress Urinary IncontinenceBurch Colposuspention
- Registration Number
- NCT05616481
- Lead Sponsor
- Al-Azhar University
- Brief Summary
This study aims to compare the success rate and complications following laparoscopic standard Burch colposuspension and laparoscopic modified Burch colposuspension (Transobturator tape like)
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- RECRUITING
- Sex
- Female
- Target Recruitment
- 120
Inclusion Criteria
- Women with genuine stress urinary incontinence.
- Mixed urinary incontinence with predominant stress element.
- Refractory cases to conservative therapy or patients who are not willing to consider (further) conservative treatment.
Exclusion Criteria
- Mixed incontinence with predominant Urge urinary incontinence.
- Recent pelvic surgery (less than 3 months).
- Neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction.
- Previous surgery for stress urinary incontinence.
- Pregnancy
- Less than 12 months post-partum.
- Other gynaecologic pathologies affecting bladder functions ( eg, fibroids, ovarian cysts)
- Genito-urinary malignancy.
- Current chemo or radiation therapy.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method The success rates of both laparoscopic Burch colposuspension versus laparoscopic modified Burch colposuspension for treatment of female stress urinary incontinence 3 months post operative
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Post operative rates of voiding dysfunction (at 3 months). at 3 months Complication rates of both techniques. up to 3 months Overall operative time Intraoperative (measured from verrus needle insertion)
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
Mohamed Fawzy Salman
🇪🇬Cairo, Egypt
Mohamed Fawzy Salman🇪🇬Cairo, EgyptMohamed Fawzy Salman, MDContact+201111788996prof_mohamed_fawzy@yahoo.com