Enema reduction of intussusception: the success rate of hydrostatic and pneumatic reduction

Jiraporn Khorana, Jesda Singhavejsakul, Nuthapong Ukarapol, Mongkol Laohapensang, Junsujee Wakhanrittee, Jayanton Patumanond, Jiraporn Khorana, Jesda Singhavejsakul, Nuthapong Ukarapol, Mongkol Laohapensang, Junsujee Wakhanrittee, Jayanton Patumanond

Abstract

Purpose: Intussusception is a common surgical emergency in infants and children. The incidence of intussusception is from one to four per 2,000 infants and children. If there is no peritonitis, perforation sign on abdominal radiographic studies, and nonresponsive shock, nonoperative reduction by pneumatic or hydrostatic enema can be performed. The purpose of this study was to compare the success rates of both the methods.

Methods: Two institutional retrospective cohort studies were performed. All intussusception patients (ICD-10 code K56.1) who had visited Chiang Mai University Hospital and Siriraj Hospital from January 2006 to December 2012 were included in the study. The data were obtained by chart reviews and electronic databases, which included demographic data, symptoms, signs, and investigations. The patients were grouped according to the method of reduction followed into pneumatic reduction and hydrostatic reduction groups with the outcome being the success of the reduction technique.

Results: One hundred and seventy episodes of intussusception occurring in the patients of Chiang Mai University Hospital and Siriraj Hospital were included in this study. The success rate of pneumatic reduction was 61% and that of hydrostatic reduction was 44% (P=0.036). Multivariable analysis and adjusting of the factors by propensity scores were performed; the success rate of pneumatic reduction was 1.48 times more than that of hydrostatic reduction (P=0.036, 95% confidence interval [CI] =1.03-2.13).

Conclusion: Both pneumatic and hydrostatic reduction can be performed safely according to the experience of the radiologist or pediatric surgeon and hospital setting. This study showed that pneumatic reduction had a higher success rate than hydrostatic reduction.

Keywords: hydrostatic reduction; intussusception; pneumatic reduction; success rate.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study flow of pneumatic and barium reduction.

References

    1. Columbani PM, Scholz S. Intussusception. In: Coran AG, Adzick NS, Krummel TM, Laberge J-M, Shamberger RC, Caldamone AA, editors. Pediatric Surgery. 7th ed. Vol. 2. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2012. pp. 1093–1110.
    1. Aronson PL, Henderson AA, Anupindi SA, et al. Comparison of clinicians to radiologists in assessment of abdominal radiographs for suspected intussusception. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2013;29(5):584–587.
    1. Alletag MJ, Riera A, Langhan ML, Chen L. Use of emergency ultrasound in the diagnostic evaluation of an infant with vomiting. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2011;27(10):986–989.
    1. Bines JE, Kohl KS, Forster J, et al. Acute intussusception in infants and children as an adverse event following immunization: case definition and guidelines of data collection, analysis, and presentation. Vaccine. 2004;22(5–6):569–574.
    1. Bekdash B, Marven SS, Sprigg A. Reduction of intussusception: defining a better index of successful non-operative treatment. Pediatr Radiol. 2013;43(6):649–656.
    1. Puri P, Hollwarth ME. Pediatric Surgery Diagnosis and Management. Berlin: Springer; 2009.
    1. He N, Zhang S, Ye X, Zhu X, Zhao Z, Sui X. Risk factors associated with failed sonographically guided saline hydrostatic intussusception reduction in children. J Ultrasound Med. 2014;33(9):1669–1675.
    1. Treves F. The Treatment of Intussusception. Br Med J. 1885;1(1253):6–9.
    1. Hipsley PL. INTUSSUSCEPTION. Br Med J. 1935;2(3902):717–721.
    1. Guo JZ, Ma XY, Zhou QH. Results of air pressure enema reduction of intussusception: 6,396 cases in 13 years. J Pediatr Surg. 1986;21(12):1201–1203.
    1. Kruatrachue A, Wongtapradit L, Nithipanya N, Ratanaprakarn W. Result of air enema reduction in 737 cases of intussusception. J Med Assoc Thai. 2011;94(Suppl 3):S22–S26.
    1. Fallon SC, Lopez ME, Zhang W, et al. Risk factors for surgery in pediatric intussusception in the era of pneumatic reduction. J Pediatr Surg. 2013;48(5):1032–1036.
    1. Daneman A, Navarro O. Intussusception. Part 2: An update on the evolution of management. Pediatr Radiol. 2004;34(2):97–108. quiz 187.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera