Abdominal Versus Vaginal Hysteropexy

Trans Vaginal Sacrospinous Hysteropexy Versus Abdominal Sacral Hysteropexy for the Management of Uterine Prolapse

Status

Completed

Phases

Study type

Interventional

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT03494582

Enrollment

Registered

2018-04-11

Start date

2017-04-01

Completion date

2018-12-01

Last updated

2018-12-03

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

Conditions

Uterine Prolapse

Brief summary

This study will compare the vaginal versus the abdominal approach for the management of uterine prolapse

Detailed description

this study compares The unilateral sacrospinous hysteropexy with prolene sutures versus the abdominal sacral hysteropexy using Mersilene suture for the management of uterine prolapse

Interventions

PROCEDURESacral Hysteropexy

Abdominal approach for uterine suspension

PROCEDUREsacrospinous Hysteropexy

Transvaginal approach for uterine suspension

Study design

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Intervention model

PARALLEL

Primary purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

FEMALE

Age

20 Years to 40 Years

Healthy volunteers

Inclusion criteria

* Uterine Prolapse

Exclusion criteria

* Previous prolapse surgery Hereditary Connective tissue disorders

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame	Description
Pelvic organ prolapse quantification system	3 month	compare Pelvic organ prolapse quantification system between groups

Secondary

Measure	Time frame	Description
Perioperative data	1 day	operative time
operative details	1 day	blood loss

Countries

Egypt

Outcome results

None listed

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