Skip to content

Compare Sacrospinous Fixation Versus High Uterosacral Ligament Fixation for Uterus Vaginal Prolapse III/IV

Sacrospinous Colpopexy Versus High Uterosacral Colpopexy in the Treatment of Genital Prolapse Grade III/IV in Women With Uterus

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01347021
Enrollment
51
Registered
2011-05-04
Start date
2006-05-31
Completion date
2011-05-31
Last updated
2011-05-04

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

Conditions

Complete Tear, Sacrospinous Ligament, Prolapse of Vaginal Vault After Hysterectomy, Uterosacral Ligament; Rupture, Uterovaginal Prolapse

Keywords

vaginal colpopexy sacrospinous, vaginal colpopexy uterosacral

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to compare the vaginal sacrospinous colpopexy and high uterosacral colpopexy in the treatment of genital prolapse grade III/IV in women with uterus.

Detailed description

Hysterectomy is often the traditional approach for women with uterovaginal prolapse. However, hysterectomy alone does not address the underlying problem of deficient apical support. Surgical options for patients with apical prolapse include transvaginal suspension procedures using pelvic structures for fixation, such as the sacrospinous ligament or uterosacral ligaments.The objective of this study is to compare the sacrospinous fixation with high uterosacral in the treatment of uterine prolapse POP-Q stage 3 or 4 in terms of recurrence of prolapse,quality of life,complications,post-operative recovery, hospital stay.

Interventions

PROCEDUREsacrospinous colpopexy versus high uterosacral colpopexy

Women with uterine prolapse grade III or IV were randomly allocated to the sacrospinous colpopexy or high uterosacral colpopexy with vaginal hysterectomy.Before the surgery P-Qol questionnaire were completed and urogynecological examination include de POP-Q system was done. All patients underwent clinical check-ups 1, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Each check-up included clinical examination and questionnaire.

Sponsors

Federal University of São Paulo
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
50 Years to 85 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* pelvic prolapse III/IV * counselling and informed consent

Exclusion criteria

* abnormal cervical smears * abnormal ultrasound findings of uterus or ovaries or abnormal uterine bleeding * pelvic radiotherapy

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POPQ) at 12 months follow-upone yearQuantification of pelvic organ prolapse, according to the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system (POPQ), as standardized by the International Continence Society.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
subjective improvement in quality of life measured by Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (P-QoL)after surgery at 12 months follow-upone year

Countries

Brazil

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 10, 2026