• Yiqin Ouyang, Rujun Chen, Lei Chu, Junhua Liang, Xueyu Zhang, Li Li, Tian Gao, Huaifang Li, and Xiaowen Tong.
• Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Tongji Hospital of Tongji University.
• Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Sep 18; 99 (38): e22332e22332.

AbstractThe pelvic organ prolapse (POP) repair systems used in China are imported and expensive. Our aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of a self-developed pelvic floor repair system versus the Avaulta system.This was a multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, noninferiority trial of 132 patients with POP stage ≥II from the Tongji Hospital Affiliated to Tongji University and the General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University enrolled from 02/2014 to 03/2015. The patients were randomized 1:1 to POP repair using the self-developed system or the Avaulta system. Perioperative conditions, POP quantification, pelvic floor impact questionnaire-7, and prolapse quality of life questionnaires, gynecological ultrasound, and postoperative complications were compared. Patients were followed at 1.5, 3, and 6 months.According to the POP quantification scores obtained at 6 months after surgery, the cure rates of the self-developed and Avaulta groups were 98.3% and 100.0%, respectively (P > .999). At 6 months follow-up, the pelvic floor impact questionnaire-7 scores of the self-developed and Avaulta groups were both improved (P < .001 vs baseline), with no between-group difference observed (P = .488). There were no differences between the 2 groups for subjective symptoms of POP (all P > .05). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups regarding complications (all P > .05).The self-developed pelvic reconstruction system is safe and effective for the treatment of POP and improves the patients' quality of life, without difference compared to the Avaulta system.

26 keywords...

hide…