Vaginal versus robotic-assisted abdominal mesh repair for apical prolapse
Official title: A Comparative Analysis of Vaginal Mesh Surgery Versus Robotic-assisted Abdominal Mesh Surgery in the Treatment of Apical Genital Prolapse: a Prospective Randomized Non-inferiority Study.
Run by University of Sao Paulo General Hospital · NCT07359755 · Data updated 2026-11-12
This study will test whether vaginal mesh repair works as well and is as safe as robotic-assisted abdominal mesh repair for women with stage II or higher apical pelvic organ prolapse.
Quick facts
| Study type | Interventional |
|---|---|
| Ages | 18 Years and up |
| Sex | Women only |
| Enrollment | 86 (estimated) |
| Sponsor | University of Sao Paulo General Hospital Academic / other |
| Locations | 1 site (São Paulo, São Paulo) |
| Status | Recruiting |
| Started | September 15, 2025 |
| Main results expected | October 2027 |
| Study ends | June 2030 |
| Registry record updated | January 22, 2026 |
| Trial ID | NCT07359755 on ClinicalTrials.gov |
Is this trial a fit for you?
✓Likely a good fit
Women with apical compartment pelvic organ prolapse stage II or higher who are candidates for elective operative correction and can complete Portuguese-language outcome questionnaires are ideal candidates.
✕Probably not a fit
Patients who need concomitant procedures that alter pelvic anatomy, have prior pelvic radiotherapy, congenital or acquired urogenital/gastrointestinal anomalies, or other contraindications to elective surgery are unlikely to benefit from participation.
A plain-English reading of the study's rules. Only the study team can confirm whether you qualify.
What this trial studies
This is a prospective, randomized non-inferiority trial comparing objective outcomes after vaginal mesh repair versus robot-assisted abdominal mesh repair for apical compartment pelvic organ prolapse. Eligible women with stage II or higher apical prolapse are randomized via REDCap to receive either Splentis® vaginal mesh with bilateral sacrospinous anchoring or Upsylon® mesh via robot-assisted colpocervicopexy to the sacral promontory. Primary outcome is objective cure (stage 0 or I) and secondary outcomes include mesh erosion, pain, and symptom-specific quality of life measured with a Portuguese-validated instrument. The sample size is calculated to test non-inferiority based on assumed cure rates for the two approaches.
Why it matters
Potential benefit: If successful, vaginal mesh repair could provide a similarly effective and safe alternative to robotic abdominal repair, potentially offering a less invasive option with shorter recovery and lower resource use.
How similar studies have gone: Robotic sacrocolpopexy has demonstrated high success rates in prior studies while outcomes and safety of transvaginal mesh have been more mixed, so randomized direct comparisons like this are relatively uncommon.
Who can join: the full rules
Show full inclusion / exclusion criteria
Inclusion Criteria: * The study will include patients diagnosed with apical compartment genital prolapse of stage II or higher, who have an indication for surgical correction. Exclusion Criteria: * The following exclusion criteria will apply: patients who are unable or unwilling to complete validated outcome assessment instruments; those requiring concomitant surgical procedures (e.g., hysterectomy or any other intervention that may alter pelvic floor anatomy); * individuals with a prior history of pelvic radiotherapy; * patients with congenital or acquired anomalies of the urogenital or gastrointestinal systems; * and those with medical conditions that constitute a contraindication to elective surgical intervention.
Where it's running
-
Hospital das Clinicas da Faculdade de Medicina de Sao Paulo
São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil Recruiting
Study contacts
- Study coordinator: Marcelo Hisano, MD PhD
- Email: m.hisano@hc.fm.usp.br
- Phone: 551126618080
Similar studies
Other studies for the same condition or treatment. Recruiting studies are listed first.
-
Comparing the Manchester procedure versus vaginal hysterectomy for uterine prolapse
This study tests whether the Manchester procedure or vaginal hysterectomy works better for women with symptomatic uterine prolapse over a two-year follow-up.
-
Wrist activity tracking to guide early recovery after pelvic organ prolapse surgery
This study will try giving women having pelvic organ prolapse surgery either usual postoperative advice or a guided early-exercise plan while tracking activity with a wrist accelerometer to see which group reaches "mostly recovered" sooner.
-
Risk predictor for new urinary incontinence after prolapse surgery
This study tests a model to predict which women might develop new stress urinary incontinence after pelvic organ prolapse repair.
-
Poly-L-lactic acid injections for vulvovaginal tissue regeneration
This trial will try injections of poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA) versus placebo to see if they strengthen vaginal tissue and reduce bulge symptoms and sexual problems in women with stage II anterior vaginal wall prolapse (cystocele).
-
Pelvic floor mesh used in laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy to repair pelvic organ prolapse
This study tests the ProGYNious mesh to see if it safely and effectively repairs pelvic organ prolapse in adults undergoing laparoscopic surgery.
-
Paracervical block for pain control after vNOTES uterosacral ligament suspension
This will test whether a paracervical injection of bupivacaine reduces early postoperative pain in women having vNOTES uterosacral ligament suspension for pelvic organ prolapse.
How to take part
- Review the eligibility criteria above with your treating physician.
- Check the official listing on ClinicalTrials.gov for the latest contact details and recruitment status.
- Contact the study coordinator or principal investigator to ask for pre-screening. Pre-screening is free and never obligates you to enroll.