Comparison of Ultrasound Guided Saline Enema and X-ray-Guided Air Enema in the Treatment of Intussusception Reduction in Children.

Journal

Pediatric emergency care

ISSN: 1535-1815

Titre abrégé: Pediatr Emerg Care

Pays: United States

ID NLM: 8507560

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
13 Feb 2024

Historique:

medline: 13 2 2024

pubmed: 13 2 2024

entrez: 13 2 2024

Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

To compare the effect of ultrasound guided saline enema (USGSE) and x-ray fluoroscopic air enema in the reduction of intussusception in children, 80 children with intussusception were randomly divided into ultrasonic-guided saline enema reduction in 40 cases (USGSE group) and x-ray air enema reduction in 40 cases (air enema group). The enema pressure, success rate, average time, and cost of the 2 methods were compared. The average operation time of the USGSE group was lower than that of the air group ([5.35 ± 1.79] min vs [6.03 ± 2.41] min, P = 0.159), the average pressure of the air group was higher than that of the air group ([10.95 ± 1.54] kPa vs [9.6 ± 1.26] kPa; P < 0.001), the success rate of resetting was higher than that of the air group (87.5% vs 85.0%; P = 0.745), and the cost of USGSE was lower than that of the air group ([339.23 ± 10.73] yuan vs [378.23 ± 18.20] yuan, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed that the success rate of enema treatment in children with onset time <48 hours was significantly higher than that in children with onset time ≥48 hours (98.30% vs 54.50%, continuous correction χ2 = 22.16; P < 0.001). The success rate and operation time of USGSE in pediatric intussusception reduction are similar to that of air enema, and the advantages of low cost and no radiation are worthy of popularization. For children with onset time ≥48 hours, enema reduction is safe and effective, but the conversion rate to open is high. It is necessary to carefully identify the symptoms of intestinal perforation and necrosis on the basis of strictly following the indications to avoid delayed treatment.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000003113 PMID: 38349384

pubmed: 38349384

doi: 10.1097/PEC.0000000000003113

pii: 00006565-990000000-00391

doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

Informations de copyright

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Disclosure: The author declares no conflict of interest.

Références

Clarence J, Edwards EA, Pigg N, et al. Intussusception: past, Present and Future [J]. 2017;47:1101–1108.

Gfroerer S, Fiegel H, Rolle U. Ultrasound-guided reduction of intussusception: a safe and effective method performed by pediatric surgeons. Pediatr Surg Int. 2016;32:679–682.

Sadigh G, Zou KH, Razavi SA, et al. Meta-analysis of air versus liquid enema for intussusception reduction in children. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205:W542–W549.

Tang XB, Zhao JY. Nosocomial nosocomial infection with nosocomial infection [J]. Paediatric Endocrinology. 2009;29:629–636.

Ito Y, Kusakawa I, Murata Y, et al. Japanese guidelines for the management of intussusception in children, 2011. Pediatr Int. 2012;54:948–958.

Bines JE, Ivanoff B, Justice F, et al. Clinical case definition for diagnosis of acute intussusception[J]. J Gastroenterol Nutr. 2004;39:511–518.

Color reduction of ileocolitical intuschanging amps by saline enema under sonography control [J]. J Gastroenterr Surg. 2016;51:179–182.

Talabi AO, Famurewa OC, Bamigbola KT, et al. Sonographic guided hydrostatic saline enema reduction of childhood intussusception: a prospective study. BMC Emerg Med. 2018;18:46.

Bekdash B, Marven SS, Sprigg A. Reduction of intussusception: defining a better index of successful non-operative treatment. Pediatr Radiol. 2013;43:649–656.

Droof-of-principle reduction versus hydrostatic reduction in pediatric patients: a randomized trial [J]. J Pediatr Surg. 2018;53:1464–1468.

Bolia AA. Diagnosis and Hydrostatic Reduction of an Intussusception under ultrasound guidance. Clin Radiol. 1985;36:655–657.

Chew R, Ditchfield M, Paul E, Goergen SK. Comparison of safety and efficacy of image-guided enema reduction techniques for paediatric intussusception: a review of the literature. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2017. 61(6): 711–717.

Reijnen JA, Festen C, Van Roosmalen RP. Intussusception: factors related to treatment. Arch Dis Child. 1990;65:871–873.

Lim RZM, Lee T, Ng JYZ, et al. Factors associated with ultrasound-guided water enema reduction for pediatric intussusception in resource-limited setting: potential predictive role of thrombocytosis and anemia. J Pediatr Surg. 2018;53:2312–2317.

Xie X, Wu Y, Wang Q, et al. A randomized trial of pneumatic reduction versus hydrostatic reduction for intussusception in pediatric patients. J Pediatr Surg. 2018;53:1464–1468.