Cargando…

Laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common health problem. The lifetime risk of undergoing surgery for prolapse is 11%. POP significantly affects the effects on quality of life and activities of daily living. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) has been viewed as the gold standard treatment f...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Chunbo, Dai, Zhiyuan, Shu, Huimin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5838885/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29506566
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2494-x
_version_ 1783304323062562816
author Li, Chunbo
Dai, Zhiyuan
Shu, Huimin
author_facet Li, Chunbo
Dai, Zhiyuan
Shu, Huimin
author_sort Li, Chunbo
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common health problem. The lifetime risk of undergoing surgery for prolapse is 11%. POP significantly affects the effects on quality of life and activities of daily living. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) has been viewed as the gold standard treatment for women with POP who desire reconstructive surgery. However, LSC is associated with technical difficulties, resulting in a long learning curve and operative time. Recently, our team introduced a new laparoscopic technique of inguinal ligament suspension (LILS) and had confirmed its safety and efficacy in treating vaginal vault prolapse. As a new surgical technique for POP, a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing the LILS with the standard technique of LSC is necessary. Therefore, we will conduct a trial. METHODS: The trial is a randomized controlled trial. It compares LILS with LSC in women with stage 2 or higher uterine prolapse. The primary outcomes of this study are perioperative parameters, including surgical time, blood loss, intraoperative complications, and hospital stay as well as surgical anatomical results using the pelvic organ prolapse questionnaire (POP-Q) classification at 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, and annually till 5 years after surgery. Secondary outcomes are subjective improvement in urogenital symptoms and quality of life, postoperative complications, postoperative recovery, sexual functioning, and cost-effectiveness at each follow-up point. Validated questionnaires will be used and the data will be analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Based on an objective success rate of 90%, a noninferiority margin of 15%, and a dropout of 20%, 107 patients are needed in each arm to prove the hypothesis with a 95% confidence interval. DISCUSSION: The trial is a randomized controlled, multicenter, noninferiority trial that will provide evidence whether the efficacy and safety of LILS is noninferior to LSC in women with symptomatic stage 2 or higher uterine prolapse. TRIAL REGISTRATION: China Trial Register (CTR): ChiCTR-INR-15007408. Registered on 9 November 2015. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2494-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5838885
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58388852018-03-09 Laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial Li, Chunbo Dai, Zhiyuan Shu, Huimin Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common health problem. The lifetime risk of undergoing surgery for prolapse is 11%. POP significantly affects the effects on quality of life and activities of daily living. Laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (LSC) has been viewed as the gold standard treatment for women with POP who desire reconstructive surgery. However, LSC is associated with technical difficulties, resulting in a long learning curve and operative time. Recently, our team introduced a new laparoscopic technique of inguinal ligament suspension (LILS) and had confirmed its safety and efficacy in treating vaginal vault prolapse. As a new surgical technique for POP, a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing the LILS with the standard technique of LSC is necessary. Therefore, we will conduct a trial. METHODS: The trial is a randomized controlled trial. It compares LILS with LSC in women with stage 2 or higher uterine prolapse. The primary outcomes of this study are perioperative parameters, including surgical time, blood loss, intraoperative complications, and hospital stay as well as surgical anatomical results using the pelvic organ prolapse questionnaire (POP-Q) classification at 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, and annually till 5 years after surgery. Secondary outcomes are subjective improvement in urogenital symptoms and quality of life, postoperative complications, postoperative recovery, sexual functioning, and cost-effectiveness at each follow-up point. Validated questionnaires will be used and the data will be analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Based on an objective success rate of 90%, a noninferiority margin of 15%, and a dropout of 20%, 107 patients are needed in each arm to prove the hypothesis with a 95% confidence interval. DISCUSSION: The trial is a randomized controlled, multicenter, noninferiority trial that will provide evidence whether the efficacy and safety of LILS is noninferior to LSC in women with symptomatic stage 2 or higher uterine prolapse. TRIAL REGISTRATION: China Trial Register (CTR): ChiCTR-INR-15007408. Registered on 9 November 2015. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2494-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-03-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5838885/ /pubmed/29506566 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2494-x Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Li, Chunbo
Dai, Zhiyuan
Shu, Huimin
Laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title Laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_full Laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_short Laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_sort laparoscopic inguinal ligament suspension versus laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy in the treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5838885/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29506566
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-2494-x
work_keys_str_mv AT lichunbo laparoscopicinguinalligamentsuspensionversuslaparoscopicsacrocolpopexyinthetreatmentofpelvicorganprolapsestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT daizhiyuan laparoscopicinguinalligamentsuspensionversuslaparoscopicsacrocolpopexyinthetreatmentofpelvicorganprolapsestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT shuhuimin laparoscopicinguinalligamentsuspensionversuslaparoscopicsacrocolpopexyinthetreatmentofpelvicorganprolapsestudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial