Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-25 @ 3:45 AM
Ignite Modification Date:
2025-12-26 @ 2:32 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT02239302
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2015-07-31
First Post:
2014-09-10
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
False
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Obstructed Defaecation: Proctography Versus Ultrasound in Symptomatic Patients
Sponsor:
Croydon University Hospital
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Obstructed Defaecation: Proctography Versus Ultrasound (TPUS and EVUS) in Symptomatic Patients
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2015-07
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
OPUS
Brief Summary:
Obstructed defaecation syndrome is a common problem in which patients experience difficulty to evacuate stools and feel that the bowel is incompletely empty, which causes the need to put fingers in to the rectum or vaginal to empty the rectum. These symptoms have a significant effect on social, physical, emotional and sexual wellbeing all of which have impact on quality of life. These symptoms are caused by posterior compartment disorders such as the last part of the large bowel bulging into the vagina (rectocele), the small bowel pressing on the rectum (enterocele), a circumferential infolding of the rectal wall (intussusception) or paradoxical pelvic floor contraction during attempts to evacuate (anismus).
Currently the evacuation proctogram is the gold standard for diagnosis of posterior compartment disorders. This technique, however, exposes the patient to ionising radiation, requires preparation of the small and large bowel with contrast and defaecation in a non-private setting, which most women find embarrassing and unpleasant. Over the years, research has focussed on identifying alternatives that are better tolerated to substitute evacuation proctography. Ultrasound is a widely available, non-expensive, non-invasive, fast and a well-tolerated method for the dynamic and static imaging of the pelvic floor without the use of ionising radiation. The level of agreement between transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) and proctography for varies widely. Endovaginal ultrasound (EVUS) not yet compared to proctography. The aim of this study is to assess the level of agreement between ultrasound (EVUS and TPUS) and evacuation proctography in the diagnosis of posterior compartment disorders.
Currently the evacuation proctogram is the gold standard for diagnosis of posterior compartment disorders. This technique, however, exposes the patient to ionising radiation, requires preparation of the small and large bowel with contrast and defaecation in a non-private setting, which most women find embarrassing and unpleasant. Over the years, research has focussed on identifying alternatives that are better tolerated to substitute evacuation proctography. Ultrasound is a widely available, non-expensive, non-invasive, fast and a well-tolerated method for the dynamic and static imaging of the pelvic floor without the use of ionising radiation. The level of agreement between transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) and proctography for varies widely. Endovaginal ultrasound (EVUS) not yet compared to proctography. The aim of this study is to assess the level of agreement between ultrasound (EVUS and TPUS) and evacuation proctography in the diagnosis of posterior compartment disorders.
Detailed Description:
None
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
True
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
None
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: