Abdominal Versus Vaginal Hysteropexy

Not Applicable

Completed

• Conditions: Uterine Prolapse
• Interventions: Procedure: Sacral Hysteropexy; Procedure: sacrospinous Hysteropexy

• Registration Number: NCT03494582
• Lead Sponsor: Ain Shams Maternity Hospital

Brief Summary

This study will compare the vaginal versus the abdominal approach for the management of uterine prolapse

Detailed Description

this study compares The unilateral sacrospinous hysteropexy with prolene sutures versus the abdominal sacral hysteropexy using Mersilene suture for the management of uterine prolapse

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2017-04-01
• Study First Submitted: 2018-03-29
• Study First Submitted QC: 2018-04-04
• Study First Posted: 2018-04-11
• Primary Completion: 2018-10-01
• Status Verified: 2018-11
• Last Update Submitted: 2018-11-30
• Study Completion: 2018-12-01
• Last Update Posted: 2018-12-03

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: COMPLETED
• Sex: Female
• Target Recruitment: 53

Inclusion Criteria

• Uterine Prolapse

Exclusion Criteria

• Previous prolapse surgery Hereditary Connective tissue disorders

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Sacral Hysteropexy	Sacral Hysteropexy	Abdominal approach for uterine suspension
sacrospinous Hysteropexy	sacrospinous Hysteropexy	Transvaginal approach for uterine suspension

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Pelvic organ prolapse quantification system	3 month	compare Pelvic organ prolapse quantification system between groups

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Perioperative data	1 day	operative time
operative details	1 day	blood loss

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Urogynecology Unit; 🇪🇬 Cairo, Egypt