At the Forefront - UChicago Medicine

CLINICAL TRIAL / NCT06634459

POMEGRANATE Trial: Comparing Reia Pessary Versus Standard of Care Pessary for Pelvic Organ Prolapse Treatment

  • Interventional
  • Active
  • NCT06634459
Eligibility DetailsVisit Clinicaltrials.gov

Contact Information

  • Jinxuan Shi

The POMEGRANATE Trial: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Pessary Home Management of Reia Pessary Versus Standard of Care Pessary for Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse

This multi-centered, randomized controlled trial will evaluate the safety and efficacy of home use of the novel Reia System (RS), which includes the Reia pessary and applicator, compared to standard pessary care (Gellhorn or ring with/without support without knob) among women with stage II-IV pelvic organ prolapse (POP). A total of 182 participants will be recruited among pessary naïve patients who are symptomatic and choose a vaginal pessary for management of their POP from study sites specializing in Urogynecology and Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery (URPS). Participants will be assigned via 1:1 randomization using computer generated numbers in permutated groups of variable block sizes to either the intervention (the Reia System, RS) or standard pessary care (SPC) stratified by site. Participation in this trial will involve a total of four visits over six months. The primary outcome measure will be satisfaction measured at the six-month time point. Secondary outcomes will include validated surveys to assess quality of life, number of self-management events, ease/difficulty of pessary insertion/removal, importance of ability to self-manage pessary, and adverse events. Specific Aims Aim 1: To compare satisfaction with pessary use and management between subjects randomized to the Reia System and those randomized to standard of care pessary. Aim 2: To assess successful fitting, number of refitting visits, number of self-management events and continued pessary use over a 6-month period between subjects randomized to the Reia System and those randomized to standard of care pessary. Aim 3: To compare ease/difficulty of pessary use and importance of ability to self-manage, as well as quality of life over a 6-month period between subjects randomized to the Reia System and those randomized to standard of care pessary. Aim 4: To measure rates of adverse events and risk factors for adverse events over a 6-month period between subjects randomized to the Reia System and those randomized to standard of care pessary.