跳至主要内容
临床试验/NCT01608568
NCT01608568Unknown不适用

AFFIXING POLYPROPYLENE MESH USING BARBED SUTURE (QUILL™ SRS) DURING ROBOTIC ASSISTED LAPAROSCOPIC SACROCOLPOPEXY RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

University of California, San Diego2 个研究点 分布在 1 个国家目标入组 32 人开始时间: 2010年11月最近更新:
适应症

试验速览

阶段
不适用
入组人数
32
试验地点
2
主要终点
Mesh attachment interval

研究概览

简要总结

1.0 STUDY OBJECTIVE 1.1 PRIMARY OBJECTIVE - To compare two methods of polypropylene mesh attachment during robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (RALSC): running technique using self-anchoring 1 barbed delayed absorbable suture (Quill™ SRS, Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Vancouver, Canada) versus interrupted technique using 0 non-barbed delayed absorbable suture (PDS II™, Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA).

1.2 SECONDARY OBJECTIVE - To compare robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy anatomic failure rates at 6 months post-operative follow-up using self-anchoring 1 barbed delayed absorbable suture (Quill™ SRS, Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Vancouver, Canada) versus 0 non-barbed delayed absorbable suture (PDS II™, Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA). The investigators will also assess mesh erosion rates, costs, and surgeon satisfaction rates.

2.0 HYPOTHESIS 2.1 Primary: 2.1.a. Attachment of mesh using the running technique with self-anchoring 1 barbed delayed absorbable suture (Quill™ SRS, Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Vancouver, Canada) will be faster than the standard fixation interrupted technique using 0 non-barbed delayed absorbable suture (PDS II™, Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA).

2.2 Secondary: 2.2.a. Attachment of mesh using the running technique with self-anchoring 1 barbed delayed absorbable suture (Quill™ SRS, Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Vancouver, Canada) will be less costly than the standard fixation interrupted technique using 0 non-barbed delayed absorbable suture (PDS II™, Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA).

2.2.b. Failure rates and mesh erosion rates for each technique will be equally low.

2.2.c. Surgeons will prefer the barbed running technique over the interrupted technique based on subjective surgeon satisfaction questionnaires.

研究设计

研究类型
Interventional
分配方式
Randomized
干预模型
Parallel
主要目的
Treatment
盲法
Double (Participant, Outcomes Assessor)

入排标准

年龄范围
18 Years 至 —(Adult, Older Adult)
性别
Female
接受健康志愿者

入选标准

  • 未提供

排除标准

  • Decline to participate
  • Pregnant or contemplating future pregnancy
  • Unable to participate in the informed consent process

结局指标

主要结局

Mesh attachment interval

时间窗: Intraoperative placement of mesh - approximately 30 minutes to 2 hours

To compare two methods of polypropylene mesh attachment during robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (RALSC): running technique using self-anchoring 1 barbed delayed absorbable suture (Quill™ SRS, Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Vancouver, Canada) versus interrupted technique using 0 non-barbed delayed absorbable suture (PDS II™, Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA)in terms of time.

次要结局

  • Anatomic outcomes using the two suture types(6 months post-operatively)

研究者

申办方类型
Other
责任方
Principal Investigator
主要研究者

Jasmine Tan-Kim

Urogynecologist

University of California, San Diego

研究点 (2)

Loading locations...

相似试验