Skip to content

Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair Plus Mini-Sling Versus Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair Alone

URINARY INCONTINENCE AND URO-GENITAL PROLAPSE: A RANDOMIZED TRIAL OF PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE REPAIR PLUS MINI-SLING VERSUS PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE REPAIR ALONE

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01384084
Enrollment
50
Registered
2011-06-28
Start date
2011-06-30
Completion date
2013-12-31
Last updated
2014-05-20

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

Conditions

Pelvic Organ Prolapse, Urinary Incontinence

Keywords

pelvic organ prolapse, urinary incontinence, sacropexy, sling

Brief summary

The investigators have performed colposacropexy in women with uterovaginal prolapse for many years with satisfactory results. This study was designed to compare whether, in the treatment of patients with uro-genital prolapse and urinary incontinence, the addition of a contemporary anti-incontinence procedure such as mini-sling is associated with a reduction of post-operative urinary incontinence (correction of pre-existent urinary incontinence and prevention of masked urinary incontinence).

Interventions

PROCEDUREPOP repair plus mini-sling

For POP, the anterior vaginal wall is dissected from the bladder to expose a vaginal wall area where the mesh will be attached. The procedure is repeated for the posterior vaginal wall. The sacral promontory surface is prepared and 1 non-reabsorbable sutures are placed into the sacral periosteum. A mini sling system will be used, placing a urethral low-tension tape anchored to the obturator muscles bilaterally at the level of tendinous arc. This mini-sling is a polypropylene monofilament mesh.

PROCEDUREPOP repair

For POP repair, the anterior vaginal wall is dissected from the bladder to expose a vaginal wall area where the mesh will be attached. The procedure is repeated for the posterior vaginal wall. The sacral promontory surface is prepared and 1 non-reabsorbable sutures are placed into the sacral periosteum. The peritoneum is closed over the meshes.

Sponsors

University Of Perugia
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
18 Years to 75 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patients affected by III-IV grade urogenital urogenital prolapsed and urinary incontinence * Candidates for pelvic organ prolapsed repair using sacropexy * Prospectively randomized, using a predetermined computer-generated randomization code (4 blocks), to sacropexy plus anti-incontinence procedure (mini-sling) or sacropexy alone

Exclusion criteria

* fertile patients * contraindication to major surgery * uterine cancer

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
urinary incontinence12 monthslong-term relief of symptoms with anatomic correction of prolapse and subjective/objective correction of urinary incontinence

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
peri and post-operative complications1 monthOperative time and morbidity according to Clavien-Dindo classification, post-operative complications, length of hospital stay.

Countries

Italy

Outcome results

None listed

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