Robot vs. surgeon: which surgery is safer for pelvic organ prolapse?
NCT ID NCT01320215
First seen Jun 24, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026 · Updated 1 time
Summary
This study compared two types of minimally invasive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse in 365 women. One group had robot-assisted surgery, while the other had standard laparoscopic surgery without a robot. The main goal was to see which approach had fewer complications within 30 days after the operation.
What this could mean
Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only — not medical advice or a prediction.
Active substance
robot-assisted or non-robot laparoscopic surgery
What this could lead to
If robot-assisted surgery proves safer, it could become the preferred option for pelvic organ prolapse repair, reducing complications and improving recovery.
What could go wrong
This is a completed trial comparing two surgical techniques, not a new treatment. Results may show no significant difference, and individual outcomes vary based on surgeon skill and patient factors.
Disclaimer
Read more
Show less
This is a summary of
the original study
.
Summaries may miss details or leave out important information. Before applying or accepting participation, make sure you have read and understood the full study. Curemydisease.com takes no responsibility whatsoever for anything missed, misunderstood, or acted upon as a result of our summary — we know it does not capture everything.
This is a summary of the original study . Summaries may miss details or leave out important information. Before applying or accepting participation, make sure you have read and understood the full study. Curemydisease.com takes no responsibility whatsoever for anything missed, misunderstood, or acted upon as a result of our summary — we know it does not capture everything.
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for PELVIC ORGAN PROLAPSE are added.
By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use
Conditions
The condition(s) this trial relates to.
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
Contacts and locations
Show contact details
Enter your email to view the contact information for this study.
By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use
Locations
-
APHP - Centre Hospitalier Henri Mondor
Créteil, 94000, France
-
APHP - Groupe Hospitalier Pitié-Salpetrière
Paris, 75651, France
-
CHRU de Strasbourg - Hôpital Civil
Strasbourg, 67091, France
-
CHRU de Toulouse - Hôpital de Rangueil
Toulouse, 31059, France
-
CHRU de Tours - Hôpital Bretonneau
Tours, 37044, France
-
CHU de Dijon
Dijon, 21079, France
-
CHU de Lyon - Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud
Pierre-Bénite, 69310, France
-
CHU de Montpellier - Hôpital Lapeyronie
Montpellier, 34295, France
-
CHU de Nancy - Hôpitaux de Brabois
Nancy, France
-
CHU de Nantes
Nantes, 44000, France
-
CHU de Nice - Hôpitaux L'Archet 1 et 2
Nice, 06202, France
-
CHU de Nîmes - Hôpital Universitaire Carémeau
Nîmes, Gard, 30029, France
-
CHU de Rennes - Hôpital PontChaillou
Rennes, 35033, France
-
Clinique Belledonne
Saint Martin d'Héres, 38400, France
-
Clinique Kennedy
Nîmes, 30900, France
-
Groupe Hospitalier Diaconesses Croix Saint-Simon - Site Reuilly
Paris, 75012, France
-
Groupe Urologie Saint Augustin
Bordeaux, 33074, France
-
Hôpital Foch
Suresnes, 92151, France