Assisted Promontofixation Using Glue Versus Promontofixation Using Threads (PROCOL)

Sponsor
Clinique Beau Soleil (Other)
Overall Status
Completed
CT.gov ID
NCT03624764
Collaborator
(none)
90
1
2
36
2.5

Study Details

Study Description

Brief Summary

The treatment of gynecological prolapse (organ removal) can be done by laparoscopy or vaginally. Laparoscopy is used in 1 out of 2 cases, but learning is difficult and operation time is long. One of the technical difficulties is related to the sutures to the threads. Some surgeons therefore use a glue to fix prosthetic reinforcements more easily and quickly, but this sizing technique has only been evaluated very little. Our study proposes to compare the technique of suture with the thread at the gluing of the prostheses in order to validate the merits of this new technique

Condition or Disease Intervention/Treatment Phase
  • Procedure: Laparostopic promontofixation using surgical glue
  • Procedure: Laparostopic promontofixation using threads
N/A

Detailed Description

Laparoscopic promontofixation is a surgical technique considered by some as the reference technique. Its difficulty of learning and the duration of operation are factors limiting its diffusion. The use of cyanoacrylate glue is proposed to simplify the procedure, without there being any comparative studies between the sutures over and the sizing of prosthetic reinforcements.

The main objective of the study is to compare the operative time of promontofixation by coelioscopy with suture using threads to promontofixation using glue.

Secondary objectives are the comparison between the two groups of complications per and postoperative, objective anatomical results and functional results of the tissue reaction judged by clinical examination (palpation) and ultrasound and direct cost.

Study Design

Study Type:
Interventional
Anticipated Enrollment :
90 participants
Allocation:
Randomized
Intervention Model:
Parallel Assignment
Masking:
Single (Participant)
Primary Purpose:
Health Services Research
Official Title:
A Randomized Comparative Study of Assisted Promontofixation Using Glue Versus Promontofixation Using Threads
Actual Study Start Date :
Jan 4, 2017
Actual Primary Completion Date :
Oct 4, 2019
Actual Study Completion Date :
Jan 4, 2020

Arms and Interventions

Arm Intervention/Treatment
Experimental: Promontofixation using glue

Patients in this arm will have a laparoscopic promontofixation using a biocompatible cyanoacrylate adhesive replacing some sutures to maintain the strips.

Procedure: Laparostopic promontofixation using surgical glue
The technique involves implanting a prosthetic tissue (tape) between the bladder and the vagina, suspending the cervix or the vagina affectionately, associated or not with a posterior strip placed between the rectum and the vagina fixed on the small pelvis muscles. Each strip is held by the surgical glue (cyanoacrylate biocompatible adhesive)

Active Comparator: Promontofixation using threads

Patients in this arm will have a laparoscopic promontofixation using sutures with threads to maintain the strips.

Procedure: Laparostopic promontofixation using threads
The technique involves implanting a prosthetic tissue (tape) between the bladder and the vagina, suspending the cervix or the vagina affectionately, associated or not with a posterior strip placed between the rectum and the vagina fixed on the small pelvis muscles. Each strip is held by sutures with threads

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

  1. Operative time [one day]

    The time elapsed between incision and closure

Secondary Outcome Measures

  1. Collection of intra-operative complications [one day]

    Collection of all the complications during the surgery (visceral wound, peroperative bleeding, other)

  2. Collection of per-operative complications [one day]

    Collection of the per-operative complications: pain at day 0 and day 1 (using the visual analog scale), urinary retention, postoperative haemorrhage or hematoma, fever> 38 ° 48 h after surgery, other complication

  3. Collection of complications at 6 weeks [6 weeks]

    Pain by the Visuel Analog Scale, emergency consultation or generalist, rehospitalization / Reintervention, other complications

  4. Tolerance of the prosthesis [6 weeks]

    Classification of the complications related to the insertion of protheses (from the International Urogynecological Association)

  5. Tolerance of the prosthesis [6 months]

    Classification of the complications related to the insertion of protheses (from the International Urogynecological Association)

  6. Tolerance of the prosthesis [12 months]

    Classification of the complications related to the insertion of protheses (from the International Urogynecological Association)

  7. Objective anatomical results at 6 weeks [Before surgery]

    International Continence Society - Pelvic organe Prolapse - Quantification (POP Q scale): stage 0 (no prolapse is demonstrated) to stage 4 (vaginal eversion is essentially complete)

  8. Objective anatomical results at 6 months [6 months after surgery]

    International Continence Society - Pelvic organe Prolapse - Quantification (POP Q scale): stage 0 (no prolapse is demonstrated) to stage 4 (vaginal eversion is essentially complete)

  9. Objective anatomical results at 12 month [12 months after surgery]

    International Continence Society - Pelvic organe Prolapse - Quantification (POP Q scale): stage 0 (no prolapse is demonstrated) to stage 4 (vaginal eversion is essentially complete)

  10. Quality of life: pelvic floor distress [Before the surgery]

    The Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 questionnary: it is both a symptom inventory and a measure of the degree of bother and distress (quality-of-life) caused by pelvic floor symptoms.The PFDI-20 includes 20 questions and 3 scales. Each of the 3 scales is scored from 0 (least distress) to 100 (greatest distress). The sum of the scores of these 3 scales serves as the overall summary score of the PFDI-20 and ranges from 0 - 300. The 3 scales include questions taken from the following widely used outcome measures: Urinary Distress Inventory - 6 questions, Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory - 6 questions, and Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory - 8 questions

  11. Quality of life: pelvic floor distress [6 months after the surgery]

    The Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 questionnary. The PFDI-20 includes 20 questions and 3 scales. Each of the 3 scales is scored from 0 (least distress) to 100 (greatest distress). The sum of the scores of these 3 scales serves as the overall summary score of the PFDI-20 and ranges from 0 - 300. The 3 scales include questions taken from the following widely used outcome measures: Urinary Distress Inventory - 6 questions, Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory - 6 questions, and Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory - 8 questions

  12. Quality of life: pelvic floor distress [12 months after the surgery]

    The Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 questionnary. The PFDI-20 includes 20 questions and 3 scales. Each of the 3 scales is scored from 0 (least distress) to 100 (greatest distress). The sum of the scores of these 3 scales serves as the overall summary score of the PFDI-20 and ranges from 0 - 300. The 3 scales include questions taken from the following widely used outcome measures: Urinary Distress Inventory - 6 questions, Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory - 6 questions, and Colorectal-Anal Distress Inventory - 8 questions

Eligibility Criteria

Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study:
40 Years and Older
Sexes Eligible for Study:
Female
Accepts Healthy Volunteers:
No
Inclusion Criteria:
  1. Age> 40 years

  2. Surgical indication of prolapse cure by promontofixation

  3. Valid social insurance

  4. French spoken and written

  5. Informed consent signed

  6. No exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:
  1. Concomitant rectopexy

  2. Concomitant Hysterectomy

  3. Associated surgical procedure not compatible with measurement of operative time

  4. Refusal to participate in the study

  5. Pregnant or lactating woman (Article L 1121-5 of the french code of public health)

  6. Vulnerable persons (Article L 1121-6 of the french code of public health)

  7. Majors subject to legal protection or unable to express their consent (Article 1121-8 of the CSP)

  8. Participation in another protocol for less than 3 months

  9. Patient does not have all the inclusion criteria.

Contacts and Locations

Locations

Site City State Country Postal Code
1 Clinique Beau Soleil Montpellier France 34070

Sponsors and Collaborators

  • Clinique Beau Soleil

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Christophe Courtieu, Clinqieu Beau Soleil

Study Documents (Full-Text)

None provided.

More Information

Publications

None provided.
Responsible Party:
Clinique Beau Soleil
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT03624764
Other Study ID Numbers:
  • 2016- A01387-44
First Posted:
Aug 10, 2018
Last Update Posted:
Feb 9, 2021
Last Verified:
Feb 1, 2021
Individual Participant Data (IPD) Sharing Statement:
No
Plan to Share IPD:
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product:
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product:
No
Keywords provided by Clinique Beau Soleil
Additional relevant MeSH terms:

Study Results

No Results Posted as of Feb 9, 2021