Value of Robotic Rectopexy for the Treatment of Complex Pelvic Floor Dysfunction

May 4, 2017 updated by: Nicolas C. Buchs

Randomized Double Blind Controlled Trial of the Value of Robotic Rectopexy for the Treatment of Complex Pelvic Floor Dysfunction

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.

Study Overview

Status

Unknown

Detailed Description

Pelvic floor dysfunction is a common pathology. The management can be medical or surgical, depending on the location or the severity of the disease.

Since the large use of laparoscopy for the treatment of pelvic floor dysfunction, interesting and encouraging results have been published.

However, so far, a laparoscopic approach has some technical disadvantages like a poor ergonomy, a 2 dimensional vision, an unstable camera and the use of straight instruments. To overcome these natural limitations, robotics has been gaining increasing acceptance in general surgery.

Several groups have reported their encouraging experience with robotic rectopexy. Yet, these studies were not randomized or double blinded.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the role of robotics for complex pelvic floor dysfunction and to compare the outcomes to the laparoscopic approach.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Anticipated)

50

Phase

  • Phase 4

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Locations

      • Geneva, Switzerland, 1211
        • Recruiting
        • University Hospital of Geneva, Department of Surgery
        • Contact:
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Nicolas C Buchs, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Bruno Roche, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • François Pugin, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Pascal Bucher, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Karel Skala, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Frédéric Ris, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Monika Hagen, MD
        • Sub-Investigator:
          • Guillaume Zufferey, MD

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • women
  • proven pelvic floor dysfunction
  • informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Age <18 years old
  • Patient unable to communicate or to understand the study
  • Patient refusing to participate to the study
  • contraindication to laparoscopy

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Robotic
Use of daVinci surgical system (Intuitive Surgical Inc, Sunnyvale, CA) for the treatment of complex pelvic floor dysfunction
Use of a minimally invasive approach (robotic or laparoscopy) to perform a rectopexy
Other Names:
  • Surgery for rectal prolapse
Active Comparator: Laparoscopy
Use of standard laparoscopy for the treatment of complex pelvic floor dysfunction
Use of a minimally invasive approach (robotic or laparoscopy) to perform a rectopexy
Other Names:
  • Surgery for rectal prolapse

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Perioperative outcomes
Time Frame: up to 30 days
Including: blood loss, operative time, conversion rate, quality of dissection, pain, complications, hospital stay.
up to 30 days

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Functional results
Time Frame: At 12 months
Constipation score Incontinence score Quality of life score Sexuality score
At 12 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Nicolas C Buchs, MD, University Hospital, Geneva

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

April 1, 2011

Primary Completion (Anticipated)

May 1, 2020

Study Completion (Anticipated)

May 1, 2020

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 29, 2011

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 29, 2011

First Posted (Estimate)

May 3, 2011

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

May 5, 2017

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

May 4, 2017

Last Verified

May 1, 2017

More Information

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Clinical Trials on Minimally invasive rectopexy

3
Subscribe