Abdominal Versus Vaginal Hysteropexy

Ain Shams Maternity Hospital

Status: Completed

Conditions: Uterine Prolapse

Treatments: Procedure: Sacral Hysteropexy; Procedure: sacrospinous Hysteropexy

Study type: Interventional

Funder types: Other

Identifiers

NCT03494582

AVVCP

Details and patient eligibility

About

This study will compare the vaginal versus the abdominal approach for the management of uterine prolapse

Full description

this study compares The unilateral sacrospinous hysteropexy with prolene sutures versus the abdominal sacral hysteropexy using Mersilene suture for the management of uterine prolapse

Enrollment: 53 patients

Sex: Female

Ages: 20 to 40 years old

Volunteers: No Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion criteria

• Uterine Prolapse

Exclusion criteria

• Previous prolapse surgery Hereditary Connective tissue disorders

Trial design

Primary purpose: Treatment

Allocation: Randomized

Interventional model: Parallel Assignment

Masking: None (Open label)

---

53 participants in 2 patient groups

Sacral Hysteropexy

Experimental group

Description:

Abdominal approach for uterine suspension

Treatment:

Procedure: Sacral Hysteropexy

sacrospinous Hysteropexy

Experimental group

Description:

Transvaginal approach for uterine suspension

Treatment:

Procedure: sacrospinous Hysteropexy