Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37882871›Full record

Trial reportArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2024

Vaginal microflora following the use of a disposable home-use vaginal device and a commercially available ring pessary for pelvic organ prolapse management: a randomized controlled trial.

Elan Ziv, Nathan Keller, Tsvia Erlich

Registry-linked trialOpen access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03345121 ([Trial of device that is not approved or cleared by the U.S. FDA]), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03345121 withheldnot on this map

[Trial of device that is not approved or cleared by the U.S. FDA]

Typen_aSponsor[Redacted]
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elan ZivConTIPI Medical Ltd, 2 Alon Ha' Tavor St, Southern Industrial Park, 3088900, Caesarea, Israel. eziv@contipi.com.ORCID 0000-0002-7187-6048
Nathan KellerAriel University, Ariel, Israel.
Tsvia ErlichConTIPI Medical Ltd, 2 Alon Ha' Tavor St, Southern Industrial Park, 3088900, Caesarea, Israel.
Medi-Tate (Israel) · ILSheba Medical Center · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate whether ProVate, a novel, disposable, self-inserted vaginal device for pelvic organ prolapse management, clinically affects the vaginal microflora, as compared with a commercially available ring pessary, to assess its microbiological safety.

methodsThis interventional, prospective, multi-center, open-label, randomized, controlled, statistically powered (noninferiority), home-use, crossover study was conducted at seven sites. Participants were randomized into either group A (using ProVate and then a new reusable commercially available ring pessary [control]) or B (using control device and then ProVate) with a 1:1 ratio. Noninferiority of ProVate over the control was evaluated for the primary endpoint, which was based on meeting one of the failure criteria: significant change in Lactobacillus spp., Gardnerella vaginalis, Candida morphotypes, or Staphylococcus aureus levels compared to the baseline (significant change: Nugent score ≥ 7 or > 1 scale unit increase in S. aureus or Candida morphotype), bothersome vaginal infection symptoms, or symptoms requiring treatment for infection.

resultsThe study included 58 participants (mean age: 64.5 years, 91.4% postmenopausal). There were no significant microfloral changes in terms of the four microorganisms mentioned above, the rate of Nugent score ≥ 7 after use was low and comparable between the two devices, and the rate of patients with a > 1 unit-scale change (increase or decrease) from the baseline to the end-of-use phase in any studied microorganism was comparable between the devices. The failure rate was 15.5% for ProVate and 15.5% for control while using 383 ProVate devices over 1647 days or one control device throughout the study. Two patients had bothersome vaginal complaints and one had overt vaginal infection in the control group, but no such cases were observed in the ProVate group.

conclusionThe primary endpoint of possible vaginal microbial changes, bothersome vaginal symptoms, or treatment-requiring vaginal complaints while using ProVate was successfully met. Our findings show that the vaginal microflora is comparable when using either ProVate or commercially available ring pessary (control) with a relatively low rate of vaginal infections. Trial registration details: ClinicalTrials.gov; URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT03345121?term=NCT03345121&draw=2&rank=1 ; No. NCT03345121; Registration date, November 17, 2017; initial enrollment started on August 20, 2017.

Indexed as

Pelvic Organ ProlapsePessariesCross-Over StudiesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedProspective StudiesStaphylococcus aureusDisposable vaginal deviceNonsurgical managementPelvic organ prolapsePessariesVaginal microflora

Identifiers

PMID37882871
PMCPMC10808192
OpenAlexW4387949751

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.