Last reviewed · How we verify

NCT03113513

Comparison of Two Apical Repair Methods in Women Undergoing Repairs for Prolapse

Status unknown NA Last updated 23 January 2024
What this trial tests

NA trial testing fixation of the vaginal apex in Pelvic Organ Prolapse in 312 participants. Status unknown.

Timeline
1 May 2016
Primary endpoint
30 April 2025
30 April 2025

Quick facts

Lead sponsorMedical University of Graz
PhaseNA
StatusStatus unknown
Study typeINTERVENTIONAL
Allocationrandomized
Designparallel
Maskingnone
Primary purposetreatment
Enrollment312
Start date1 May 2016
Primary completion30 April 2025
Estimated completion30 April 2025
Sites1 location across Austria

Drugs / interventions tested

Conditions studied

Sponsor

Medical University of Graz

Who can join

Adults 35 to 80, female only, with Pelvic Organ Prolapse or Surgery. Patients with the condition only — healthy volunteers not accepted.

Sponsor's own description

To date no study has determined prospectively which technique is superior to prevent recurrent Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) after vaginal hysterectomy- a major unmet clinical need. The aim of the study is to determine objective anatomical recurrent prolapse after Sacrospinous Ligament Fixation (SLF) vs McCall.

Publications & conference data

No peer-reviewed publications indexed yet for this trial.

Verify or expand the search:

Other recruiting trials for Pelvic Organ Prolapse

Currently open trials in the same condition.

Other Medical University of Graz trials

Trials by the same sponsor.

Verify against primary sources

Data sources for this page

Drug Landscape aggregates and links these public records for informational use only. Always verify against the primary source before clinical or regulatory decisions. Canonical URL: https://druglandscape.com/trial/NCT03113513.

Primary sources · FDA · ClinicalTrials.gov · EMA · SEC EDGAR · ChEMBL · Wikidata · full sourcing