此页面是自动翻译的,不保证翻译的准确性。请参阅 英文版 对于源文本。

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Learning Curve of Laparoscopic Pectopexy Versus Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy

2026年5月18日 更新者:Rafail gebrael、Ain Shams University

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Learning Curve of Laparoscopic Pectopexy Versus Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy in Treatment of Apical Prolapse

Pelvic organ prolapse, particularly apical prolapse, is a common condition among aging women, and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy is considered the standard surgical treatment due to its high anatomical success. However, it poses technical challenges and risks related to sacral dissection.

Laparoscopic pectopexy, a newer technique using the iliopectineal ligament for mesh fixation, offers a safer anatomical route with shorter operative time and fewer complications. The previous studies evaluate the sacrocolpopexy and pectopexy are all retrospective. This study is prospective randomized controlled study that adds Comparison on the success rate and learning curve of pectopexy versus sacrocolpopexy .

研究概览

详细说明

Pelvic organ prolapse (POP), particularly apical prolapse, is a prevalent condition that significantly impairs the quality of life in aging women, with a global prevalence ranging from 20% to 65% among those over 50 years of age. It involves the downward displacement of the vaginal apex, uterus, or vaginal vault, and is frequently accompanied by urinary, bowel, and sexual dysfunction. Despite conservative measures, many women with symptomatic POP ultimately require surgical correction to restore pelvic anatomy and function.

Multiple surgical techniques have been developed for apical suspension, including transvaginal approaches (e.g., sacrospinous fixation, high uterosacral ligament suspension), transabdominal techniques, and laparoscopic modalities. Among laparoscopic approaches, sacrocolpopexy (LSC) has long been considered the gold standard due to its superior anatomical outcomes compared to native tissue repair or vaginal mesh-based procedures.

However, it demands advanced laparoscopic skills, has a steep learning curve, and carries a risk of complications such as presacral hemorrhage, mesh erosion, defecation dysfunction, and sacral osteomyelitis.

Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy involves dissection at the sacral promontory and mesh fixation to the anterior longitudinal ligament. Although it provides excellent long-term anatomical support-with reported objective success rates between 78% and 100%-it is associated with longer operative time and potential injuries to the ureter, bowel, or vessels. Furthermore, the anatomical challenges posed by the sacral promontory, especially in obese patients, can hinder operative safety and efficiency.

Laparoscopic pectopexy, first described by Banerjee and Noé in 2011, is an emerging alternative technique in which the mesh is bilaterally anchored to the iliopectineal (Cooper's) ligaments. This anterior fixation avoids dissection near critical retroperitoneal structures and preserves the posterior pelvic space, thereby reducing the risk of defecation disorders and nerve injury. Pectopexcy an emerging technique offers a potential alternative for apical prolapse repaire .this study aims to compare its efficacy &safety with conventional procedures.

研究类型

介入性

注册 (估计的)

30

阶段

  • 不适用

联系人和位置

本节提供了进行研究的人员的详细联系信息,以及有关进行该研究的地点的信息。

学习联系方式

研究联系人备份

学习地点

    • Abbasia
      • Cairo、Abbasia、埃及
        • 招聘中
        • Ain Shams University Hospital
        • 接触:

参与标准

研究人员寻找符合特定描述的人,称为资格标准。这些标准的一些例子是一个人的一般健康状况或先前的治疗。

资格标准

适合学习的年龄

  • 成人
  • 年长者

接受健康志愿者

不

描述

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients diagnosed with uterine prolapse with POP-Q stage ≥ III.
  • Patients diagnosed with vault vaginal prolapse with POP-Q stage ≥ III.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients who refuse to participate in the study.
  • Patients who have isolated anterior or posterior vaginal wall prolapse.
  • Women who are pregnant or lactating.
  • Patients with severe comorbidities, including: Serious heart, liver, kidney, or blood diseases or any condition preventing them from tolerating surgery.
  • Women with a desire to conceive.

学习计划

本节提供研究计划的详细信息,包括研究的设计方式和研究的衡量标准。

研究是如何设计的?

设计细节

  • 主要用途:治疗
  • 分配:随机化
  • 介入模型:并行分配
  • 屏蔽:无(打开标签)

武器和干预

参与者组/臂
干预/治疗
有源比较器:Laparoscopic Pectopexy
About 15 women patients suffering from apical prolapse and will undergo Laparoscopic Pectopexy and The Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) stages will be evaluated preoperatively.
to evaluate the effectiveness and learning curve of laparoscopic pectopexy in comparison with laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy for the treatment of apical prolapse performed by the same surgeon.
有源比较器:Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy
About 15 women patients suffering from apical prolapse and will undergo Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy.and The Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) stages will be evaluated preoperatively.
Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy

研究衡量的是什么?

主要结果指标

结果测量
措施说明
大体时间
Pain Assessment
大体时间:24 Hours
To assess the Pain intensity after the operation and the pain will be evaluated using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) whereas : 0 is no pain, and 10 is worst pain.
24 Hours
Number of participants treated
大体时间:6 Months
Treatment of the female patients whom suffering from Apical Prolapse using laparoscopic pectopexy and laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy
6 Months

合作者和调查者

在这里您可以找到参与这项研究的人员和组织。

调查人员

  • 学习椅:Ahmed Farouk, M.D、Professor of Urology Department of Urology Ain Shams University

研究记录日期

这些日期跟踪向 ClinicalTrials.gov 提交研究记录和摘要结果的进度。研究记录和报告的结果由国家医学图书馆 (NLM) 审查,以确保它们在发布到公共网站之前符合特定的质量控制标准。

研究主要日期

学习开始 (实际的)

2026年4月1日

初级完成 (估计的)

2026年10月1日

研究完成 (估计的)

2026年10月10日

研究注册日期

首次提交

2026年5月10日

首先提交符合 QC 标准的

2026年5月18日

首次发布 (实际的)

2026年5月19日

研究记录更新

最后更新发布 (实际的)

2026年5月19日

上次提交的符合 QC 标准的更新

2026年5月18日

最后验证

2026年4月1日

更多信息

与本研究相关的术语

其他研究编号

  • Apical Prolapse

计划个人参与者数据 (IPD)

计划共享个人参与者数据 (IPD)?

未定

药物和器械信息、研究文件

研究美国 FDA 监管的药品

不

研究美国 FDA 监管的设备产品

不

此信息直接从 clinicaltrials.gov 网站检索,没有任何更改。如果您有任何更改、删除或更新研究详细信息的请求,请联系 register@clinicaltrials.gov. clinicaltrials.gov 上实施更改,我们的网站上也会自动更新.

订阅