Skip to content

Sacrocolpopexy Versus Vaginal Mesh Procedure for Pelvic Prolapse

Anatomic and Functional Outcomes of Vaginal Mesh ( ELEVATE) Compared With Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01097200
Enrollment
60
Registered
2010-04-01
Start date
2010-05-31
Completion date
2021-11-30
Last updated
2021-03-23

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Cystocele, Enterocele, Rectocele, Uterine Prolapse, Vaginal Vault Prolapse

Keywords

sacrocolpopexy, meshes, sacrospinous ligament

Brief summary

Pelvic prolapse is one of the most frequent pathology in Gynecology. Recurrency of the prolapse after primary surgery is relatively high, 15-30%. Sacrocolpopexy has showed to be effective but it requires a long learning curves and is more aggressive. New meshes techniques seem to be effective, as well, with less learning curve but they are expensive and there are no randomize studies published. The investigators aim is to compare both techniques in terms of: anatomical and functional efficacy, cost, operating time and complications.

Interventions

The correction of the prolapse can be made by this new technique.

Attach a mesh between the vagina and the promontorium.

Sponsors

American Medical Systems
CollaboratorINDUSTRY
Francisco Carmona
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
21 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Subject has been diagnosed with one or more clinically significant anterior, apical, or posterior genital prolapse disorder(s)(symptomatic POP-Q stage II or higher) requiring surgical repair.

Exclusion criteria

* Investigator determines subject is not a candidate for surgical repair of her genital prolapse. * Subject has had a prior prolapse procedure involving graft placement (synthetic or biologic) * Subject has active or latent systemic infection or signs of tissue necrosis. * Subject has restricted leg motion (inability to abduct or adduct leg positioning in the lithotomy position) with or without a hip replacement / prosthesis. * Subject is currently pregnant or intends to become pregnant during the study period. * Subject has had radiation therapy to the pelvic area. * Subject has pelvic cancer, has had pelvic cancer within the past 12 months or has been on cytostatic medication within the past 12 months. * Subject has uncontrolled diabetes. * Subject is on any medication with could result in compromised immune response, such as immune modulators. * Subject has undergone previous pelvic surgery \< 6 months prior to enrollment in this study. * Subject is unwilling or unable to give valid informed consent. * Subject is unwilling or unable to comply with the requirements of the protocol, complete all quality of Life questionnaires and return for all follow-up visits. * Subject with contraindications for laparoscopy

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Functional and anatomical efficacy1 year

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
operating time, cost and complications of both techniques6 months

Countries

Spain

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026