Skip to content

Xenform Postmarket Surveillance Study

A Prospective, Non-Randomized, Parallel Cohort, Multi-Center Study of Xenform vs. Native Tissue for the Treatment of Women With Anterior/Apical Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01945580
Acronym
Xenform
Enrollment
374
Registered
2013-09-18
Start date
2014-02-10
Completion date
2020-02-12
Last updated
2021-04-14

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

Conditions

Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Keywords

POP, Transvaginal, Native Tissue Repair, Repair Augmented with Mesh, Biologic Graft, Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Brief summary

To compare transvaginal repair with a biologic graft to traditional native tissue repair in women surgically treated for anterior and/or apical pelvic organ prolapse.

Detailed description

The primary objective is to evaluate clinical effectiveness of transvaginal repair with Xenform against traditional native tissue repair in women surgically treated for anterior and/or apical pelvic organ prolapse. Secondary objectives are to evaluate Xenform-related complications and subject reported outcomes. The primary endpoint of the study is to achieve non-inferiority of transvaginal repair with Xenform over native tissue repair at 36 months as compared to baseline. Success will be based on a composite of objective and subjective measures. Additionally, a co-primary endpoint of the study is to achieve non-inferiority of transvaginal repair with Xenform to native tissue repair for safety by comparing rates of serious device or serious procedure related complications between baseline and the 36 month time point. The secondary endpoints of the study include assessments of complications and subject reported outcomes.

Interventions

PROCEDUREProlapse Repair

Transvaginal anterior/apical pelvic organ prolapse repair

Sponsors

Boston Scientific Corporation
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

* Subject is female * Subject is at least 18 years of age * Subject has pelvic organ prolapse with the leading edge at or beyond the hymen. At or beyond the hymen is defined as POP-Q scores of Ba≥0 (for prolapse of the anterior compartment alone) or C≥0 (for prolapse of the apical compartment alone) or C≥-1/2 TVL and Ba≥0 (for a multi-compartment prolapse that includes the anterior and apical compartments). * Subject reports a bothersome bulge they can see or feel per PFDI-20, question 3, response of 2 or higher (i.e., responses of somewhat, moderately, or quite a bit) * Subject or subject's legally authorized representative is willing to provide written informed consent * Subject is willing and able to comply with the follow-up regimen

Exclusion criteria

* Subject is pregnant or intends to become pregnant during the study * Subject has an active or chronic systemic infection including any gynecologic infection, untreated urinary tract infection (UTI) or tissue necrosis * Subject has history of pelvic organ cancer (e.g. uterine, ovarian, bladder, colo-rectal or cervical) * Subject has had prior or is currently undergoing radiation, laser therapy, or chemotherapy in the pelvic area * Subject has taken systemic steroids (within the last month), or immunosuppressive or immunomodulatory treatment (within the last 3 months) * Subject has systemic connective tissue disease (e.g. scleroderma, systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), Marfan syndrome, Ehlers Danlos, collagenosis, polymyositis, polymyalgia rheumatica) * Subject has chronic systemic pain that includes the pelvic area or chronic focal pain that involves the pelvis * Subject has uncontrolled diabetes mellitus (DM) * Subject has a known neurologic or medical condition affecting bladder function (e.g., multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury or stroke with residual neurologic deficit) * Subject is seeking obliterative vaginal surgery as treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (colpocleisis) * Subject is not able to conform to the modified dorsal lithotomy position * Subject is currently participating in or plans to participate in another device or drug study during this study * Subject has a known sensitivity to any Xenform component * Subject has had previous prolapse repair with mesh in the target compartment * Subject is planning to undergo a concomitant prolapse repair with use of mesh in the non-target compartment

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants With Success at 36 Months36 MonthsThe primary endpoint of the study was to achieve non-inferiority of transvaginal repair with Xenform over NTR at 36 months as compared to baseline. Success was based on a composite of objective and subjective measures. 1. Subjective success was achieved if the patient denied symptoms of vaginal bulging per Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) question 3, answering no or yes but Not at all bothersome (\< 2). 2. Anatomic success (in the operated compartment): * Anterior segment: Leading edge of anterior prolapse was at or above the hymen or Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q) point Ba ≤ 0. * Apical segment: The vaginal apex did not descend more than one-half into the vaginal canal (i.e., POP-Q point C \< -1/2 TVL) for multi-compartment prolapse or POP-Q point C ≤ 0 for single compartment apical prolapse. 3. No retreatment for POP: no additional surgical treatment for POP in the segment(s) of the vagina treated at the index surgery or no pessary use
Number of Participants With One or More Serious Device-related and/or Procedure-Related Adverse Events36 monthsCo-primary endpoint of the study was to achieve non-inferiority of transvaginal mesh repair with Xenform to NTR for safety by comparing rates of serious device-related or serious procedure-related complications between baseline and the 36-month time point.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants With de Novo Dyspareunia36 monthsIncidence of de novo dyspareunia at 36 months
Subject Specific Outcomes Measured With the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7)]36 monthsImprovement in subject specific outcomes at 36 months compared to baseline \[quality of life (QOL) per the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7)\] The PFIQ-7 is composed of three separate but related assessments: the UIQ-7 addresses the impact of urinary incontinence symptoms, the CRAIQ-7 addresses the impact of colorectal-anal or bowel symptoms, and the POPIQ-7 addresses impact of vaginal and pelvic symptoms. For each question, the low score (0) corresponds to not at all and the high score (3) corresponds to quite a bit. The scores for the UIQ-7, CRAIQ-7 and POPIQ-7 are additive to yield the final PFIQ-7 score. The scale scores are then added together to get the total PFIQ-7 score, which ranges from 0-300. A lower score means there is a lesser effect on quality of life. Reported score is change from baseline at 36 months.
Subject Specific Outcomes Measured by the Pelvic Floor Symptoms Per the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20)36 monthsImprovement in subject specific outcomes at 36 months compared to baseline \[pelvic floor symptoms per the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20)\] The Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (PFDI-20) is complimentary to the PFIQ-7 and focuses on symptoms of distress in the same compartmentalized fashion as the PFIQ-7. Like the PFIQ-7, the PFDI-20 consists of three components: Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI; 6 questions), the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory (POPDI; 6 questions), and Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory (CRADI; 8 questions). The scoring for the PFDI-20 is similar to the PFIQ-7 where each individual component score is summed. The total ranges from 0 to 300 with a higher score indicating a greater impact to QOL (i.e., distress symptoms are more noticeable) and a lower score indicating a lesser impact to QOL (i.e., distress symptoms are less noticeable). The reported result is change from baseline at 36 months.
Subject Specific Outcomes Measured by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12)36 monthsImprovement in subject specific outcomes at 36 months compared to baseline \[change in sexual functioning per the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12)\] This is a self-administered questionnaire and the responses are graded on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (always) to 4 (never). Values range from 0 to 48 and a higher score indicates better sexual function. The reported result is change from baseline at 36 months.
Number of Participants With Mesh Erosion36 monthsIncidence of Mesh Erosion at 36 months
Subject Improvement Measured by the Patient Global Impression of Improvement for Prolapse (PGI-I)36 monthsAssessment of subject's level of improvement, measured by the Patient Global Impression of Improvement for Prolapse (PGI-I) The Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) for prolapse symptoms is a validated QOL instrument that assesses patient perception of overall improvement after surgical interventions for POP.12 The scale rates the patient's improvement or worsening of prolapse symptoms relative to baseline. The scale is as follows: 1- Very much better; 2- Much better; 3- A little better; 4- No change; 5- A little worse; 6- Much worse; 7- Very much worse. Assessments were performed at 6-month intervals beginning 6 months after the index procedure.
Number of Participants With Re-Intervention or Re-Surgery36 monthsAbsence of re-intervention or re-surgery for recurrence or persistence of POP or Xenform exposure/erosion
Surgical Success36 monthsSurgical success based on the following composite outcome: 1. Subjective success: Patient denied symptoms of vaginal bulging per PFDI-20 question 3, answering no or yes but Not at all bothersome (˂ 2) 2. Anatomic success (in the operated compartment): * Anterior Segment: No anterior prolapse at or beyond the hymen or POP-Q point Ba ˂ 0 * Apical Segment: The vaginal apex did not descend more than one-half into the vaginal canal (i.e., POP-Q point C ˂ 1/2 TVL) for multi-compartment prolapse or POP-Q point C ˂ 0 for prolapse of the apical compartment alone * No retreatment for POP (treated segment): No additional surgical treatment for POP in the segment(s) of the vagina treated at the index surgery or no pessary use since index surgery ('treated segment' refers to the target compartments in this study, which are the anterior and apical compartments)
Incidence of Complications36 MonthsIncidence of the following device-related or procedure-related adverse events (AEs): pelvic pain, infection, vaginal shortening, atypical vaginal discharge, neuromuscular problems, vaginal scarring, de novo vaginal bleeding, fistula formation and/or de novo voiding dysfunction.
Subject Specific Outcomes: Pain Measured by the TOMUS Pain Scale36 monthsImprovement in subject specific outcomes at 36 months compared to baseline \[pain per the TOMUS pain scale\] The TOMUS Pain Score, a visual analog instrument with a scale of 0 (no pain sensation) to 10 (most intense pain sensation imaginable), was used to assess pain associated with surgery for pelvic organ prolapse in this study. There are seven (7) questions each with a maximum score of 10 and a possible score range of 0-70). The reported results are change from baseline at 36 months.
Number of Participants With Mesh Exposure36 MonthsIncidence of mesh exposure at 36 months

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Pre-assignment details

412 subjects were screened and 374 subjects were enrolled in the Xenform Postmarket Surveillance Study. 228 subjects were enrolled into the Xenform arm and 146 subjects into the NTR arm. 339 subjects from the AUGS PFD Registry (64 subjects from BSC's Uphold™ LITE 522 study \[NCT01917968\], 69 subjects from Acell's MatriStem® 522 study & 206 subjects from Coloplast's 522 Restorelle® study) were pulled into the NTR arm for a total of 485 subjects in the NTR cohort and a total of 713 subjects overall

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Xenform
Prolapse Repair with Xenform Soft Tissue Repair Matrix Prolapse Repair: Transvaginal anterior/apical pelvic organ prolapse repair
228
Control
Prolapse Repair with Native Tissue Only Prolapse Repair: Transvaginal anterior/apical pelvic organ prolapse repair
485
Total713

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyDeath72
Overall StudyDeath in family, then rescheduled but considered too far out of window to bring back01
Overall StudyFamily illness - unable to return01
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up2639
Overall StudyMoved out of state and firmly desired to withdraw. AE still not recovered and not resolved.10
Overall StudyNo data available02
Overall StudyNoncompliance with 36 month visit10
Overall StudyPatient moved out of state01
Overall StudyPhysician Decision32
Overall StudyThe patient moved.10
Overall StudyWeather emergency at time visit due; per sponsor completed study due to being too far out of window01
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject1335

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicXenformControlTotal
Age, Continuous58.2 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.7
61.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.5
60.7 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.4
Diabetes22 Participants63 Participants85 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
27 Participants20 Participants47 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
199 Participants457 Participants656 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
2 Participants8 Participants10 Participants
Menopausal Status
Perimenopausal
19 Participants27 Participants46 Participants
Menopausal Status
Postmenopausal
170 Participants404 Participants574 Participants
Menopausal Status
Premenopausal
39 Participants54 Participants93 Participants
Previous Pelvic Surgery136 Participants235 Participants371 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
6 Participants11 Participants17 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
16 Participants55 Participants71 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
1 Participants1 Participants2 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
7 Participants9 Participants16 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
198 Participants409 Participants607 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
228 participants485 participants713 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
228 Participants485 Participants713 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Smoking
Current
21 Participants38 Participants59 Participants
Smoking
Never
164 Participants308 Participants472 Participants
Smoking
Not Recorded
2 Participants0 Participants2 Participants
Smoking
Previous
41 Participants139 Participants180 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
7 / 2282 / 485
other
Total, other adverse events
131 / 228312 / 485
serious
Total, serious adverse events
20 / 22827 / 485

Outcome results

Primary

Number of Participants With One or More Serious Device-related and/or Procedure-Related Adverse Events

Co-primary endpoint of the study was to achieve non-inferiority of transvaginal mesh repair with Xenform to NTR for safety by comparing rates of serious device-related or serious procedure-related complications between baseline and the 36-month time point.

Time frame: 36 months

Population: 412 subjects were screened and 374 subjects were enrolled in the Xenform Postmarket Surveillance Study. 228 subjects were enrolled into the Xenform arm and 146 subjects into the NTR arm. 339 subjects from the AUGS PFD Registry (64 subjects from BSC's Uphold™ LITE 522 study, 69 subjects from Acell's MatriStem® 522 study and 206 subjects from Coloplast's 522 Restorelle® study) were pulled into the NTR arm for a total of 485 subjects in the NTR cohort and a total of 713 study subjects overall.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
XenformNumber of Participants With One or More Serious Device-related and/or Procedure-Related Adverse Events12 Participants
ControlNumber of Participants With One or More Serious Device-related and/or Procedure-Related Adverse Events13 Participants
90% CI: [-0.8, 4.7]
Primary

Number of Participants With Success at 36 Months

The primary endpoint of the study was to achieve non-inferiority of transvaginal repair with Xenform over NTR at 36 months as compared to baseline. Success was based on a composite of objective and subjective measures. 1. Subjective success was achieved if the patient denied symptoms of vaginal bulging per Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) question 3, answering no or yes but Not at all bothersome (\< 2). 2. Anatomic success (in the operated compartment): * Anterior segment: Leading edge of anterior prolapse was at or above the hymen or Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q) point Ba ≤ 0. * Apical segment: The vaginal apex did not descend more than one-half into the vaginal canal (i.e., POP-Q point C \< -1/2 TVL) for multi-compartment prolapse or POP-Q point C ≤ 0 for single compartment apical prolapse. 3. No retreatment for POP: no additional surgical treatment for POP in the segment(s) of the vagina treated at the index surgery or no pessary use

Time frame: 36 Months

Population: 412 subjects were screened and 374 subjects were enrolled in the Xenform Postmarket Surveillance Study. 228 subjects were enrolled into the Xenform arm and 146 subjects into the NTR arm. 339 subjects from the AUGS PFD Registry (64 subjects from BSC's Uphold™ LITE 522 study, 69 subjects from Acell's MatriStem® 522 study and 206 subjects from Coloplast's 522 Restorelle® study) were pulled into the NTR arm for a total of 485 subjects in the NTR cohort and a total of 713 study subjects overall.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
XenformNumber of Participants With Success at 36 Months191 Participants
ControlNumber of Participants With Success at 36 Months390 Participants
90% CI: [-5.6, 5.9]
Secondary

Incidence of Complications

Incidence of the following device-related or procedure-related adverse events (AEs): pelvic pain, infection, vaginal shortening, atypical vaginal discharge, neuromuscular problems, vaginal scarring, de novo vaginal bleeding, fistula formation and/or de novo voiding dysfunction.

Time frame: 36 Months

Population: 412 subjects were screened and 374 subjects were enrolled in the Xenform Postmarket Surveillance Study. 228 subjects were enrolled into the Xenform arm and 146 subjects into the NTR arm. 339 subjects from the AUGS PFD Registry (64 subjects from BSC's Uphold™ LITE 522 study, 69 subjects from Acell's MatriStem® 522 study and 206 subjects from Coloplast's 522 Restorelle® study) were pulled into the NTR arm for a total of 485 subjects in the NTR cohort and a total of 713 study subjects overall.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
XenformIncidence of Complicationsinfection25 Participants
XenformIncidence of Complicationsvaginal scarring3 Participants
XenformIncidence of Complicationsatypical vaginal discharge2 Participants
XenformIncidence of Complicationsde novo vaginal bleeding3 Participants
XenformIncidence of Complicationsvaginal shortening0 Participants
XenformIncidence of Complicationsfistula formation0 Participants
XenformIncidence of Complicationsneuromuscular problems3 Participants
XenformIncidence of Complicationsde novo voiding dysfunction35 Participants
XenformIncidence of Complicationspelvic pain14 Participants
ControlIncidence of Complicationsde novo voiding dysfunction23 Participants
ControlIncidence of Complicationspelvic pain28 Participants
ControlIncidence of Complicationsinfection68 Participants
ControlIncidence of Complicationsvaginal shortening0 Participants
ControlIncidence of Complicationsatypical vaginal discharge3 Participants
ControlIncidence of Complicationsneuromuscular problems14 Participants
ControlIncidence of Complicationsvaginal scarring1 Participants
ControlIncidence of Complicationsde novo vaginal bleeding7 Participants
ControlIncidence of Complicationsfistula formation0 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With de Novo Dyspareunia

Incidence of de novo dyspareunia at 36 months

Time frame: 36 months

Population: 412 subjects were screened and 374 subjects were enrolled in the Xenform Postmarket Surveillance Study. 228 subjects were enrolled into the Xenform arm and 146 subjects into the NTR arm. 339 subjects from the AUGS PFD Registry (64 subjects from BSC's Uphold™ LITE 522 study, 69 subjects from Acell's MatriStem® 522 study and 206 subjects from Coloplast's 522 Restorelle® study) were pulled into the NTR arm for a total of 485 subjects in the NTR cohort and a total of 713 study subjects overall.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
XenformNumber of Participants With de Novo Dyspareunia2 Participants
ControlNumber of Participants With de Novo Dyspareunia6 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Mesh Erosion

Incidence of Mesh Erosion at 36 months

Time frame: 36 months

Population: The population includes the 228 subjects in the Xenform arm of the study.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
XenformNumber of Participants With Mesh Erosion0 Participants
ControlNumber of Participants With Mesh Erosion0 Participants
ModerateNumber of Participants With Mesh Erosion0 Participants
SevereNumber of Participants With Mesh Erosion0 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Mesh Exposure

Incidence of mesh exposure at 36 months

Time frame: 36 Months

Population: The population includes the 228 subjects in the Xenform arm of the study.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
XenformNumber of Participants With Mesh Exposure2 Participants
ControlNumber of Participants With Mesh Exposure2 Participants
ModerateNumber of Participants With Mesh Exposure0 Participants
SevereNumber of Participants With Mesh Exposure0 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Re-Intervention or Re-Surgery

Absence of re-intervention or re-surgery for recurrence or persistence of POP or Xenform exposure/erosion

Time frame: 36 months

Population: 412 subjects were screened and 374 subjects were enrolled in the Xenform Postmarket Surveillance Study. 228 subjects were enrolled into the Xenform arm and 146 subjects into the NTR arm. 339 subjects from the AUGS PFD Registry (64 subjects from BSC's Uphold™ LITE 522 study, 69 subjects from Acell's MatriStem® 522 study and 206 subjects from Coloplast's 522 Restorelle® study) were pulled into the NTR arm for a total of 485 subjects in the NTR cohort and a total of 713 study subjects overall.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
XenformNumber of Participants With Re-Intervention or Re-SurgeryOffice-Based Intervention for Recurrent Prolapse1 Participants
XenformNumber of Participants With Re-Intervention or Re-SurgerySurgical Intervention for Recurrent Prolapse5 Participants
XenformNumber of Participants With Re-Intervention or Re-SurgeryOffice-Based Intervention for Complications23 Participants
XenformNumber of Participants With Re-Intervention or Re-SurgerySurgical Intervention for Complications15 Participants
ControlNumber of Participants With Re-Intervention or Re-SurgerySurgical Intervention for Complications34 Participants
ControlNumber of Participants With Re-Intervention or Re-SurgeryOffice-Based Intervention for Recurrent Prolapse2 Participants
ControlNumber of Participants With Re-Intervention or Re-SurgeryOffice-Based Intervention for Complications40 Participants
ControlNumber of Participants With Re-Intervention or Re-SurgerySurgical Intervention for Recurrent Prolapse15 Participants
Secondary

Subject Improvement Measured by the Patient Global Impression of Improvement for Prolapse (PGI-I)

Assessment of subject's level of improvement, measured by the Patient Global Impression of Improvement for Prolapse (PGI-I) The Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) for prolapse symptoms is a validated QOL instrument that assesses patient perception of overall improvement after surgical interventions for POP.12 The scale rates the patient's improvement or worsening of prolapse symptoms relative to baseline. The scale is as follows: 1- Very much better; 2- Much better; 3- A little better; 4- No change; 5- A little worse; 6- Much worse; 7- Very much worse. Assessments were performed at 6-month intervals beginning 6 months after the index procedure.

Time frame: 36 months

Population: The 175 Xenform arm participants and 399 Native Tissue Repair arm participants are indicative of the available information at the 36 month timepoint (i.e. the number of participants who completed the PGI-I at Baseline and 36 months).

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
XenformSubject Improvement Measured by the Patient Global Impression of Improvement for Prolapse (PGI-I)1.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.9
ControlSubject Improvement Measured by the Patient Global Impression of Improvement for Prolapse (PGI-I)1.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.9
Secondary

Subject Specific Outcomes Measured by the Pelvic Floor Symptoms Per the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20)

Improvement in subject specific outcomes at 36 months compared to baseline \[pelvic floor symptoms per the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20)\] The Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (PFDI-20) is complimentary to the PFIQ-7 and focuses on symptoms of distress in the same compartmentalized fashion as the PFIQ-7. Like the PFIQ-7, the PFDI-20 consists of three components: Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI; 6 questions), the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory (POPDI; 6 questions), and Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory (CRADI; 8 questions). The scoring for the PFDI-20 is similar to the PFIQ-7 where each individual component score is summed. The total ranges from 0 to 300 with a higher score indicating a greater impact to QOL (i.e., distress symptoms are more noticeable) and a lower score indicating a lesser impact to QOL (i.e., distress symptoms are less noticeable). The reported result is change from baseline at 36 months.

Time frame: 36 months

Population: The 175 Xenform arm participants and 400 Native Tissue Repair arm participants are indicative of the available information at the 36 month timepoint (i.e. the number of participants who completed the PFDI-20 questionnaire at Baseline and 36 months).

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
XenformSubject Specific Outcomes Measured by the Pelvic Floor Symptoms Per the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20)-80.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 58.6
ControlSubject Specific Outcomes Measured by the Pelvic Floor Symptoms Per the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20)-77.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 56.1
Secondary

Subject Specific Outcomes Measured by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12)

Improvement in subject specific outcomes at 36 months compared to baseline \[change in sexual functioning per the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12)\] This is a self-administered questionnaire and the responses are graded on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (always) to 4 (never). Values range from 0 to 48 and a higher score indicates better sexual function. The reported result is change from baseline at 36 months.

Time frame: 36 months

Population: The 78 Xenform arm participants and 156 Native Tissue Repair arm participants are indicative of the available information at the 36 month timepoint (i.e. the number of participants who completed the PISQ-12 questionnaire at Baseline and 36 months).

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
XenformSubject Specific Outcomes Measured by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12)5.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.2
ControlSubject Specific Outcomes Measured by the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Function Questionnaire (PISQ-12)4.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.8
Secondary

Subject Specific Outcomes Measured With the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7)]

Improvement in subject specific outcomes at 36 months compared to baseline \[quality of life (QOL) per the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7)\] The PFIQ-7 is composed of three separate but related assessments: the UIQ-7 addresses the impact of urinary incontinence symptoms, the CRAIQ-7 addresses the impact of colorectal-anal or bowel symptoms, and the POPIQ-7 addresses impact of vaginal and pelvic symptoms. For each question, the low score (0) corresponds to not at all and the high score (3) corresponds to quite a bit. The scores for the UIQ-7, CRAIQ-7 and POPIQ-7 are additive to yield the final PFIQ-7 score. The scale scores are then added together to get the total PFIQ-7 score, which ranges from 0-300. A lower score means there is a lesser effect on quality of life. Reported score is change from baseline at 36 months.

Time frame: 36 months

Population: The 174 Xenform arm participants and 399 Native Tissue Repair arm participants are indicative of the available information at the 36 month timepoint (i.e. the number of participants who completed the PFIQ-7 questionnaire at Baseline and 36 months).

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
XenformSubject Specific Outcomes Measured With the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7)]-55.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 62.8
ControlSubject Specific Outcomes Measured With the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7)]-41.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 55
Secondary

Subject Specific Outcomes: Pain Measured by the TOMUS Pain Scale

Improvement in subject specific outcomes at 36 months compared to baseline \[pain per the TOMUS pain scale\] The TOMUS Pain Score, a visual analog instrument with a scale of 0 (no pain sensation) to 10 (most intense pain sensation imaginable), was used to assess pain associated with surgery for pelvic organ prolapse in this study. There are seven (7) questions each with a maximum score of 10 and a possible score range of 0-70). The reported results are change from baseline at 36 months.

Time frame: 36 months

Population: The 175 Xenform arm participants and 399 Native Tissue Repair arm participants are indicative of the available information at the 36 month timepoint (i.e. the number of participants who completed the TOMUS pain scale at Baseline and 36 months).

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
XenformSubject Specific Outcomes: Pain Measured by the TOMUS Pain Scale-4.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.8
ControlSubject Specific Outcomes: Pain Measured by the TOMUS Pain Scale-4.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.3
Secondary

Surgical Success

Surgical success based on the following composite outcome: 1. Subjective success: Patient denied symptoms of vaginal bulging per PFDI-20 question 3, answering no or yes but Not at all bothersome (˂ 2) 2. Anatomic success (in the operated compartment): * Anterior Segment: No anterior prolapse at or beyond the hymen or POP-Q point Ba ˂ 0 * Apical Segment: The vaginal apex did not descend more than one-half into the vaginal canal (i.e., POP-Q point C ˂ 1/2 TVL) for multi-compartment prolapse or POP-Q point C ˂ 0 for prolapse of the apical compartment alone * No retreatment for POP (treated segment): No additional surgical treatment for POP in the segment(s) of the vagina treated at the index surgery or no pessary use since index surgery ('treated segment' refers to the target compartments in this study, which are the anterior and apical compartments)

Time frame: 36 months

Population: 412 subjects were screened and 374 subjects were enrolled in the Xenform Postmarket Surveillance Study. 228 subjects were enrolled into the Xenform arm and 146 subjects into the NTR arm. 339 subjects from the AUGS PFD Registry (64 subjects from BSC's Uphold™ LITE 522 study, 69 subjects from Acell's MatriStem® 522 study and 206 subjects from Coloplast's 522 Restorelle® study) were pulled into the NTR arm for a total of 485 subjects in the NTR cohort and a total of 713 study subjects overall.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
XenformSurgical Success183 Participants
ControlSurgical Success351 Participants

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