Cargando…
Evaluation of two vaginal, uterus sparing operations for pelvic organ prolapse: modified Manchester operation (MM) and sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH), a study protocol for a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial (the SAM study)
BACKGROUND: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) affects up to 40% of parous women which adversely affects the quality of life. During a life time, 20% of all women will undergo an operation. In general the guidelines advise a vaginal operation in case of uterine descent: hysterectomy with uterosacral ligame...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6444578/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30940171 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12905-019-0749-7 |
_version_ | 1783408053892153344 |
---|---|
author | Schulten, Sascha F. M. Enklaar, Rosa A. Kluivers, Kirsten B. van Leijsen, Sanne A. L. Jansen-van der Weide, Marijke C. Adang, Eddy M. M. van Bavel, Jeroen van Dongen, Heleen Gerritse, Maaike B. E. van Gestel, Iris Malmberg, G. G. Alec Mouw, Ronald J. C. van Rumpt-van de Geest, Deliana A. Spaans, Wilbert A. van der Steen, Annemarie Stekelenburg, Jelle Tiersma, E. Stella M. Verkleij-Hagoort, Anneke C. Vollebregt, Astrid Wingen, Chantal B. M. Weemhoff, Mirjam van Eijndhoven, Hugo W. F. |
author_facet | Schulten, Sascha F. M. Enklaar, Rosa A. Kluivers, Kirsten B. van Leijsen, Sanne A. L. Jansen-van der Weide, Marijke C. Adang, Eddy M. M. van Bavel, Jeroen van Dongen, Heleen Gerritse, Maaike B. E. van Gestel, Iris Malmberg, G. G. Alec Mouw, Ronald J. C. van Rumpt-van de Geest, Deliana A. Spaans, Wilbert A. van der Steen, Annemarie Stekelenburg, Jelle Tiersma, E. Stella M. Verkleij-Hagoort, Anneke C. Vollebregt, Astrid Wingen, Chantal B. M. Weemhoff, Mirjam van Eijndhoven, Hugo W. F. |
author_sort | Schulten, Sascha F. M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) affects up to 40% of parous women which adversely affects the quality of life. During a life time, 20% of all women will undergo an operation. In general the guidelines advise a vaginal operation in case of uterine descent: hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament plication (VH), sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH) or a modified Manchester operation (MM). In the last decade, renewed interest in uterus sparing techniques has been observed. Previous studies have shown non-inferiority between SSH and VH. Whether or not SSH and MM are comparable concerning anatomical and functional outcome is still unknown. The practical application of both operations is at least in The Netherlands a known cause of practice pattern variation (PPV). To reveal any difference between both techniques the SAM-study was designed. METHODS: The SAM-study is a randomized controlled multicentre non-inferiority study which compares SSH and MM. Women with symptomatic POP in any stage, uterine descent and POP-Quantification (POP-Q) point D at ≤ minus 1 cm are eligible. The primary outcome is the composite outcome at two years of absence of prolapse beyond the hymen in any compartment, the absence of bulge symptoms and absence of reoperation for pelvic organ prolapse. Secondary outcomes are hospital parameters, surgery related morbidity/complications, pain perception, further treatments for prolapse or urinary incontinence, POP-Q anatomy in all compartments, quality-of-life, sexual function, and cost-effectiveness. Follow-up takes place at 6 weeks, 12 and 24 months. Additionally at 12 weeks, 6 and 9 months cost-effectiveness will be assessed. Validated questionnaires will be used and gynaecological examination will be performed. Analysis will be performed following the intention-to-treat and per protocol principle. With a non-inferiority margin of 9% and an expected loss to follow-up of 10%, 424 women will be needed to prove non-inferiority with a confidence interval of 95%. DISCUSSION: This study will evaluate the effectiveness and costs of SSH versus MM in women with primary POP. The evidence will show whether the existing PPV is detrimental and a de-implementation process regarding one of the operations is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register (NTR 6978, http://www.trialregister.nl). Date of registration: 29 January 2018. Prospectively registered. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6444578 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64445782019-04-11 Evaluation of two vaginal, uterus sparing operations for pelvic organ prolapse: modified Manchester operation (MM) and sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH), a study protocol for a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial (the SAM study) Schulten, Sascha F. M. Enklaar, Rosa A. Kluivers, Kirsten B. van Leijsen, Sanne A. L. Jansen-van der Weide, Marijke C. Adang, Eddy M. M. van Bavel, Jeroen van Dongen, Heleen Gerritse, Maaike B. E. van Gestel, Iris Malmberg, G. G. Alec Mouw, Ronald J. C. van Rumpt-van de Geest, Deliana A. Spaans, Wilbert A. van der Steen, Annemarie Stekelenburg, Jelle Tiersma, E. Stella M. Verkleij-Hagoort, Anneke C. Vollebregt, Astrid Wingen, Chantal B. M. Weemhoff, Mirjam van Eijndhoven, Hugo W. F. BMC Womens Health Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) affects up to 40% of parous women which adversely affects the quality of life. During a life time, 20% of all women will undergo an operation. In general the guidelines advise a vaginal operation in case of uterine descent: hysterectomy with uterosacral ligament plication (VH), sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH) or a modified Manchester operation (MM). In the last decade, renewed interest in uterus sparing techniques has been observed. Previous studies have shown non-inferiority between SSH and VH. Whether or not SSH and MM are comparable concerning anatomical and functional outcome is still unknown. The practical application of both operations is at least in The Netherlands a known cause of practice pattern variation (PPV). To reveal any difference between both techniques the SAM-study was designed. METHODS: The SAM-study is a randomized controlled multicentre non-inferiority study which compares SSH and MM. Women with symptomatic POP in any stage, uterine descent and POP-Quantification (POP-Q) point D at ≤ minus 1 cm are eligible. The primary outcome is the composite outcome at two years of absence of prolapse beyond the hymen in any compartment, the absence of bulge symptoms and absence of reoperation for pelvic organ prolapse. Secondary outcomes are hospital parameters, surgery related morbidity/complications, pain perception, further treatments for prolapse or urinary incontinence, POP-Q anatomy in all compartments, quality-of-life, sexual function, and cost-effectiveness. Follow-up takes place at 6 weeks, 12 and 24 months. Additionally at 12 weeks, 6 and 9 months cost-effectiveness will be assessed. Validated questionnaires will be used and gynaecological examination will be performed. Analysis will be performed following the intention-to-treat and per protocol principle. With a non-inferiority margin of 9% and an expected loss to follow-up of 10%, 424 women will be needed to prove non-inferiority with a confidence interval of 95%. DISCUSSION: This study will evaluate the effectiveness and costs of SSH versus MM in women with primary POP. The evidence will show whether the existing PPV is detrimental and a de-implementation process regarding one of the operations is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register (NTR 6978, http://www.trialregister.nl). Date of registration: 29 January 2018. Prospectively registered. BioMed Central 2019-04-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6444578/ /pubmed/30940171 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12905-019-0749-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 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 Schulten, Sascha F. M. Enklaar, Rosa A. Kluivers, Kirsten B. van Leijsen, Sanne A. L. Jansen-van der Weide, Marijke C. Adang, Eddy M. M. van Bavel, Jeroen van Dongen, Heleen Gerritse, Maaike B. E. van Gestel, Iris Malmberg, G. G. Alec Mouw, Ronald J. C. van Rumpt-van de Geest, Deliana A. Spaans, Wilbert A. van der Steen, Annemarie Stekelenburg, Jelle Tiersma, E. Stella M. Verkleij-Hagoort, Anneke C. Vollebregt, Astrid Wingen, Chantal B. M. Weemhoff, Mirjam van Eijndhoven, Hugo W. F. Evaluation of two vaginal, uterus sparing operations for pelvic organ prolapse: modified Manchester operation (MM) and sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH), a study protocol for a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial (the SAM study) |
title | Evaluation of two vaginal, uterus sparing operations for pelvic organ prolapse: modified Manchester operation (MM) and sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH), a study protocol for a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial (the SAM study) |
title_full | Evaluation of two vaginal, uterus sparing operations for pelvic organ prolapse: modified Manchester operation (MM) and sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH), a study protocol for a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial (the SAM study) |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of two vaginal, uterus sparing operations for pelvic organ prolapse: modified Manchester operation (MM) and sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH), a study protocol for a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial (the SAM study) |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of two vaginal, uterus sparing operations for pelvic organ prolapse: modified Manchester operation (MM) and sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH), a study protocol for a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial (the SAM study) |
title_short | Evaluation of two vaginal, uterus sparing operations for pelvic organ prolapse: modified Manchester operation (MM) and sacrospinous hysteropexy (SSH), a study protocol for a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial (the SAM study) |
title_sort | evaluation of two vaginal, uterus sparing operations for pelvic organ prolapse: modified manchester operation (mm) and sacrospinous hysteropexy (ssh), a study protocol for a multicentre randomized non-inferiority trial (the sam study) |
topic | Study Protocol |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6444578/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30940171 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12905-019-0749-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schultensaschafm evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT enklaarrosaa evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT kluiverskirstenb evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT vanleijsensanneal evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT jansenvanderweidemarijkec evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT adangeddymm evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT vanbaveljeroen evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT vandongenheleen evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT gerritsemaaikebe evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT vangesteliris evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT malmbergggalec evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT mouwronaldjc evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT vanrumptvandegeestdelianaa evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT spaanswilberta evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT vandersteenannemarie evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT stekelenburgjelle evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT tiersmaestellam evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT verkleijhagoortannekec evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT vollebregtastrid evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT wingenchantalbm evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT weemhoffmirjam evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy AT vaneijndhovenhugowf evaluationoftwovaginaluterussparingoperationsforpelvicorganprolapsemodifiedmanchesteroperationmmandsacrospinoushysteropexysshastudyprotocolforamulticentrerandomizednoninferioritytrialthesamstudy |