ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
Avaulta Versus Anterior Repair
Vaginal prolapse is a well-known disease and is observed in approximately 11% of all postmenopausal women and tending to increase with age. Consequently, many surgical procedures have been developed in order to ensure sufficient support for the bladder, rectum or vaginal vault depending on the site of the defect. However, many procedures are associated with a high recurrence rate up to 40 % even within one to two years after the surgical procedure. Due to the high recurrence rate new methods include the use of mesh, either biologically or synthetic. The latter is a permanent implant and therefore theoretically may result in a long-lasting anatomically correct position of the prolapse. Although the recurrence rate may be lower using a mesh such surgical procedures may be associated with adverse events such as erosions of the vaginal mucosa. Others have observed shrinkage of the vaginal mucosa. However, in these studies large prolene mesh have been used. In contrast the recurrence rate is lowered up to 25%. The above-mentioned advantage of synthetic mesh is however, mostly based on few non-randomised studies. We therefore find it of importance to evaluate whether a surgical procedure using a mesh implant is superior to conventional surgical techniques. The present study is a clinical controlled study where patients with anterior vaginal prolapse are randomised to either a mesh technique or a standard anterior procedure. The present study includes only two more visits at the outpatient clinic after the surgical procedure. Furthermore the patients have to fulfil questionnaires regarding urinary and faecal leakage and sexual habits. Any participation in the study is totally voluntary and the patient may at any time withdraw herself. In any case the patient will receive our standard treatment. The study is performed in all the Scandinavian countries.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- The Use of Avaulta for Anterior Repair#916983
- Laparoscopic Suture Versus Mesh Rectopexy for the Treatment of Persistent Complete Rectal Prolapse in Children#1088559
- GYNECARE PROSIMA* Procedure Versus Modified Total Pelvic Floor Reconstructive Surgery for Uterine Prolapse Stage III#1127176
- LAparoscopic Preventive PRErectal Mesh#856364
- Comparison of Root Coverage Outcomes by NORD Flap Versus Subepithelial Connective Tissue Graft in RT1 Gingival Recession#803440
Record · ID 874162
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive