Literature DB >> 1891259

Are hydrostatic and pneumatic methods of intussusception reduction comparable?

M A Sargent1, B P Wilson.   

Abstract

The hydrostatic pressures and flow rates of barium sulphate and water soluble contrast in concentrations representative of those used for intussusception reduction were measured. The change of height with discharge of fluid from the filled kit was also assessed. A group of experienced paediatric radiologists and radiographers significantly underestimated the height to which contrast should be placed for intussusception reduction. The results indicate that baseline hydrostatic reduction pressures tend to be less and maximum pressures significantly less than those presently advocated for pneumatic reduction. This disparity may account for the apparent improvement in intussusception reduction rates reported for air enema when compared with barium enema. Intraluminal pressure monitoring during contrast enema would aid control of intussusception reduction but hydrostatic reduction would still be at a disadvantage because of lower flow rates. Where hydrostatic reduction is performed, the contrast density and height used should be set to give known pressure, according to local guidelines.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1891259     DOI: 10.1007/bf02011483

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatr Radiol        ISSN: 0301-0449


  10 in total

1.  Comparison of oxygen and barium reduction of ileocolic intussusception.

Authors:  E Phelan; J F de Campo; G Malecky
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Analgesic premedication in the management of ileocolic intussusception.

Authors:  R J Touloukian; J B O'Connell; R I Markowitz; N Rosenfield; J H Seashore; R C Ablow
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 7.124

3.  Intraluminal pressure measurements during barium enema: full column vs. air contrast.

Authors:  W C Diner; G Patel; E C Texter; M L Baker; J M Tune; M D Hightower
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1981-08       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Serosal laceration: a complication of intra-operative colonoscopy explained by transmural pressure gradients.

Authors:  R W Sjogren; H A Heit; L F Johnson; D E Gremillion; M L Butler; R C Cammerer
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1978-08       Impact factor: 9.427

5.  Air-pressure-induced colon injury during diagnostic colonoscopy.

Authors:  R A Kozarek; D L Earnest; M E Silverstein; R G Smith
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1980-01       Impact factor: 22.682

Review 6.  Intussusception: evolution of current management.

Authors:  J Bruce; Y S Huh; D R Cooney; M P Karp; J E Allen; T C Jewett
Journal:  J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr       Date:  1987 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.839

7.  Perforation of the intussuscepted colon.

Authors:  A Humphry; S H Ein; P M Mok
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1981-12       Impact factor: 3.959

8.  Intussusception in infants and children: diagnosis and therapy.

Authors:  G S Bisset; D R Kirks
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  John Caffey Award. Intussusception reduction in children by rectal insufflation of air.

Authors:  L Gu; D J Alton; A Daneman; D A Stringer; P Liu; D M Wilmot; B J Reilly
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  Management of intussusception in infants and children: a survey based on 288 consecutive cases.

Authors:  J Gierup; H Jorulf; A Livaditis
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1972-10       Impact factor: 7.124

  10 in total
  10 in total

Review 1.  Intussusception in children: evidence-based diagnosis and treatment.

Authors:  Kimberly E Applegate
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2009-04

2.  Therapeutic enema for pediatric ileocolic intussusception: using a balloon catheter improves efficacy.

Authors:  Bradford W Betz; Jeffrey E Hagedorn; Jeffrey S Guikema; Courtney L Barnes
Journal:  Emerg Radiol       Date:  2013-06-09

3.  Comparative safety and efficacy of balloon use in air enema reduction for pediatric intussusception.

Authors:  Farahnaz Golriz; Christopher I Cassady; Brandy Bales; Christi Herrejon; M John Hicks; Wei Zhang; Robert C Orth; R Paul Guillerman
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2018-05-24

4.  Why I still use barium for intussusception.

Authors:  A K Poznanski
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  1995

5.  Current methods for reducing intussusception: external manual reduction with US assistance.

Authors:  Jose L Vazquez; Catherine Adamsbaum; Patricia Blanco; Stephanie Franchi-Abella
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2015-06-26

6.  Current methods for reducing intussusception: survey results.

Authors:  Rebecca Stein-Wexler; Rachel O'Connor; Heike Daldrup-Link; Sandra L Wootton-Gorges
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2014-11-29

Review 7.  Reduction of intussusception: defining a better index of successful non-operative treatment.

Authors:  Basil Bekdash; Sean S Marven; Alan Sprigg
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2012-12-20

8.  External manual reduction of paediatric idiopathic ileocolic intussusception with US assistance: a new, standardised, effective and safe manoeuvre.

Authors:  Jose L Vazquez; Manuel Ortiz; Maria C Doniz; Margarita Montero; Victor M Del Campo
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2012-08-09

Review 9.  Selecting appropriate gastroenteric contrast media for diagnostic fluoroscopic imaging in infants and children: a practical approach.

Authors:  Michael J Callahan; Jennifer M Talmadge; Robert D MacDougall; Patricia L Kleinman; George A Taylor; Carlo Buonomo
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2016-10-10

10.  Pneumatic reduction of intussusception using carbon dioxide.

Authors:  C A Paterson; J C Langer; S Somers; G Stevenson; F P McGrath; D Malone; A L Winthrop; G Y Lau
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  1994
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.