Active clinical trials for "Pelvic Organ Prolapse"

The purpose of this study is to compare postoperative complications and outcome two different attachment sites of the dorsal mesh support in laparoscopic sacropexy.

The trial design is a quasi-experimental cohort trial that includes women referred for pelvic organ prolapse specific physiotherapy. Candidates will be selected via a convenience sampling method from four physiotherapy outpatient departments at a NHS trust within Greater Manchester. The data collection occurred in January-June 2019 and ethical approval was granted by School Research Ethics, University of Salford. Treatment aims to ensure there is respect for their autonomy, treatment is fair (Justice), no harm is done to the participant (nonmaleficence) and treatment benefits the participants (beneficence). Participants are required to complete a consent form prior to their initial session. To ensure methodological quality, the STROBE guidelines will be followed to make certain all apt information required is reported to allow for replication of the intervention. The trial aims to include (n=60) women with a diagnosed pelvic organ prolapse. They are required to complete 16 weeks of supervised pelvic floor exercises with a specialist physiotherapist as documented within the most recent NICE guidelines. The outcome measures used will be the Pelvic Organ Prolapse symptom score (POPSS) and this will be documented before and after the 16 week period. Along side the POPSS, the patients body mass index and severity of pelvic organ prolapse will also be recorded and the results of this will be correlated post trial using the relevant data analysis testing methods.

After reconstructive pelvic surgery urinary retention occurs in up to 60% of patients requiring an indwelling catheter or self-catheterization (1-5). Up to 35% of women with acute retention experience urinary tract infections in the postoperative period (6, 7). Many women consider being discharged with a Foley catheter to be a surgical complication and describe catheter use as the worst aspect of their surgery(8). At this time there is no consensus within the field of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery (FPMRS) on how to best assess voiding function postoperatively. FPMRS providers both within the United States and around the world utilize a variety of void trial methods and varying criteria to determine adequacy of post-operative voiding efficiency (5). The traditional backfill assisted void trial method involves the assessment of a postvoid residual (PVR) volume obtained either via catheterization or bladder scan (3). Recently, there have been efforts to determine ways to avoid the assessment of a PVR as it is time-consuming and potentially exposes the patient to additional catheterizations (9, 10). Many FPMRS providers utilize the backfill assisted method without assessing a PVR and instead utilize a certain voided volume threshold to determine adequate voiding. However, to date, no one has directly studied this approach or compared the traditional backfill assisted void trial to a PVR-free backfill assisted void trial. By decreasing catheterization and creating a more efficient void trial method, the investigators hope improve patients' postoperative experience and reduce catheterization and risk of urinary tract infection (UTI). This study aims to compare two void trial methodologies in order to help standardize post-operative care in the urogynecology population. This study also has potential to lead to an overall change in our field and improve the postoperative course for women across the country and abroad.

The purpose of this study is to compare anatomical differences, quality of life and sexual function and complications rate between apical support with one anterior vaginal mesh versus repair with two separate meshes.

The purpose of this randomized double blind controlled study is to assess the value of robotics for the treatment of complex pelvic floor dysfunction. The main aim is to compare perioperative and functional outcomes to the laparoscopic approach.

The purpose of this study is to prospectively assess the outcomes of robotic sacrocolpopexy for repair of pelvic organ prolapse in high volume european centers.

The study includes five (5) main stages: Screening, Enrollment, Size fitting, Usage and Termination. Subject screening will be held during visit one (1) and visit two (2) at the clinic. Initiation and Size fitting: All eligible subjects will undergo size fitting by a gynecologist / urogynecologist, during visit 2, to find the suitable size for her. The subject will use the ProVATE device of the chosen size at the clinic vicinity for about one (1) hour and for 40-80 hours at her home environment, to confirm that the chosen size is appropriate for the user. Each usage will be followed by a vaginal examination. In case the investigator will determine that the subject should be fitted with a different size of the ProVATE device the subject will repeat this stage with a different device size until the suitable size is confirmed by the investigator. Usage: The subject will use the ProVATE device for at least 28 days during a 45 days period, at her home environment, and fill a usage diary. Each device will be used for at least 24 hours. At least one (1) follow-up phone call will be held with the subject per a week. After 14 usage days or following at least two (2) usages (the latest of them) the subject will be scheduled for vaginal examination at the clinic (visit four (4)). End Of Use At the end of use the subject will return to the clinic (visit five (5)) for a vaginal examination and additional activities. The following questionnaires will be filled at baseline and end of study: Quality Of Life (QoL) and POP symptoms. Satisfaction and Ease Of Use questionnaires will be filled at the end of use (visit 5) Up to four (4) ProVATE device models will be tested in this study.

To assess the urinary symptoms and urodynamic findings concomitant with Pelvic organ prolapse before and after surgical treatment and to define the role of urodynamic study in treatment decision making.

Comparison incident of urinary retention in patients with vaginal surgery of pelvic organ prolapse, who removed urinary catheter at 24 hours versus 48 hours after surgery

This randomized controlled study is designed to test the non inferiority of no attachment of posterior mesh compared to fixation of posterior mesh to the vagina in laparoscopic sacral colpopexy in terms of anatomical correction of the prolapse, post-operative and long term morbidity and rate of recurrence.