WHO ICTRP trial
Effectiveness of oral Solifenacin versus minimally invasive surgery in treatment…
ACTRN12617000284369 · Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) · Recruiting
Key facts
| Trial ID | ACTRN12617000284369 |
|---|---|
| Public title | Effectiveness of oral Solifenacin versus minimally invasive surgery in treatment of urge incontinence. |
| Scientific title | Which one is the best for curing urge incontinence: oral Solifenacin or minimally invasive surgery ? |
| Primary sponsor | Mugla Sitki Kocman University |
| Registry | Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) |
| Recruitment status | Recruiting |
| Study type | Interventional |
| Conditions | Female urinary urge incontinence ;Urinary stress incontinence ;Solid fecal incontinence;Liquid fecal incontinence;Wind incontinence;Rectal prolapse |
| Interventions | A randomized trial comparing two treatments for urge incontinence Arm 1: an anticholinergic drug (Solifenacin)given 5 mg once daily for 6 months. Arm 2: surgical plication of the cardinal/uterosacral ligaments plication- this is a minimally… |
| Registration date | Feb 23, 2017 |
| Target size | 192 |
| Registry page | anzctr.org.au |
At a glance
- No Results available
Counts are shown as ranges. Exact figures, trends and every underlying record are available in Orca1.
About WHO ICTRP trial registrations
The WHO ICTRP combines trial registrations from primary registries worldwide into a single searchable index. Contact and ethics-committee details are not shown here.
Source: World Health Organization (WHO), International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) · Source date: