Trials / Unknown
UnknownNCT01608568
Affixing Polypropylene Mesh Using Barbed Suture (Quill™ SRS) During Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Sacrocolpopexy
AFFIXING POLYPROPYLENE MESH USING BARBED SUTURE (QUILL™ SRS) DURING ROBOTIC ASSISTED LAPAROSCOPIC SACROCOLPOPEXY RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
- Status
- Unknown
- Phase
- N/A
- Study type
- Interventional
- Enrollment
- 32 (estimated)
- Sponsor
- University of California, San Diego · Academic / Other
- Sex
- Female
- Age
- 18 Years
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
Summary
1.0 STUDY OBJECTIVE 1.1 PRIMARY OBJECTIVE - To compare two methods of polypropylene mesh attachment during robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (RALSC): running technique using self-anchoring 1 barbed delayed absorbable suture (Quill™ SRS, Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Vancouver, Canada) versus interrupted technique using 0 non-barbed delayed absorbable suture (PDS II™, Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA). 1.2 SECONDARY OBJECTIVE - To compare robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy anatomic failure rates at 6 months post-operative follow-up using self-anchoring 1 barbed delayed absorbable suture (Quill™ SRS, Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Vancouver, Canada) versus 0 non-barbed delayed absorbable suture (PDS II™, Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA). The investigators will also assess mesh erosion rates, costs, and surgeon satisfaction rates. 2.0 HYPOTHESIS 2.1 Primary: 2.1.a. Attachment of mesh using the running technique with self-anchoring 1 barbed delayed absorbable suture (Quill™ SRS, Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Vancouver, Canada) will be faster than the standard fixation interrupted technique using 0 non-barbed delayed absorbable suture (PDS II™, Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA). 2.2 Secondary: 2.2.a. Attachment of mesh using the running technique with self-anchoring 1 barbed delayed absorbable suture (Quill™ SRS, Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Vancouver, Canada) will be less costly than the standard fixation interrupted technique using 0 non-barbed delayed absorbable suture (PDS II™, Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA). 2.2.b. Failure rates and mesh erosion rates for each technique will be equally low. 2.2.c. Surgeons will prefer the barbed running technique over the interrupted technique based on subjective surgeon satisfaction questionnaires.
Conditions
Interventions
| Type | Name | Description |
|---|---|---|
| DEVICE | Device is the type of suture used: Quill suture vs. Interrupted suture | To compare two methods of polypropylene mesh attachment during robotic assisted laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy (RALSC): running technique using self-anchoring 1 barbed delayed absorbable suture (Quill™ SRS, Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Vancouver, Canada) versus interrupted technique using 0 non-barbed delayed absorbable suture (PDS II™, Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA). |
Timeline
- Start date
- 2010-11-01
- Primary completion
- 2012-08-01
- Completion
- 2013-08-01
- First posted
- 2012-05-31
- Last updated
- 2012-06-01
Locations
1 site across 1 country: United States
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov record NCT01608568. Inclusion in this directory is not an endorsement.