Literature DB >> 8424351

Gas enema for the reduction of intussusception: relationship between clinical signs and symptoms and outcome.

M Katz1, E Phelan, J B Carlin, S W Beasley.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to establish the extent to which the clinical features of intussusception can be used to predict successful outcome of gas enema and to determine whether the nonsurgical management of intussusception in children can be improved by refining the criteria used to select patients for gas enema. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Clinical data on 282 consecutive episodes of intussusception (255 patients) were collected prospectively from January 1987 to July 1991. Gas enema was performed in 273 episodes, in which the clinical signs and symptoms were studied by using logistic regression. Nine patients had primary surgery.
RESULTS: Gas enema was successful in 216 (79%) of 273 enemas attempted. Fifty-seven patients had surgery after unsuccessful enema. Univariate analysis showed significant associations between successful enema and duration of signs and symptoms less than 12 hr, no rectal bleeding, absence of small-bowel obstruction, presence of a palpable mass, and normal hydration. Multivariate analysis showed that dehydration, small-bowel obstruction, and duration of signs and symptoms longer than 12 hr were significant predictors of unsuccessful enema; yet, in these groups the rate of success still justified attempted enema. Even in severe dehydration, the successful enema reduction rate was 31%.
CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that although the factors identified had some predictive value in determining the outcome of attempted enema reduction, they could not be used to indicate patients in whom enema reduction should not be attempted. All patients with intussusception should have a gas enema if the absolute contraindications to enema (i.e., peritonitis or perforation) are absent.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8424351     DOI: 10.2214/ajr.160.2.8424351

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  9 in total

1.  Why I still use barium for intussusception.

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

2.  Hydrostatic reduction of intussusception under US guidance.

Authors:  W K Rohrschneider; J Tröger
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  1995

3.  Ultrasound-guided Hartmann's solution enema: first-choice procedure for reducing idiopathic intussusception.

Authors:  D Di Renzo; M Colangelo; G Lauriti; F De Girolamo; A Persico; P Lelli Chiesa
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2012-01-07       Impact factor: 3.469

4.  Intussusception presenting to a paediatric accident and emergency department.

Authors:  I A Macdonald; T F Beattie
Journal:  J Accid Emerg Med       Date:  1995-09

Review 5.  Intussusception. Part 2: An update on the evolution of management.

Authors:  Alan Daneman; Oscar Navarro
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2003-11-21

6.  Ultrasound guided hydrostatic reduction in the management of intussusception.

Authors:  Shahul Hameed
Journal:  Indian J Pediatr       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 5.319

7.  Treatment Outcome of Acute Intussusception in Children Under Two Years of Age: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Nguyen Thanh Xuan; Nguyen Huu Son; Ho Huu Thien
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2020-04-18

8.  Paediatric Intussusception: A Clinical Scoring System to Predict the Risk of Operative Intervention.

Authors:  Charu Tiwari; Hemanshi Shah; Gursev Sandlas; Jyoti Bothra
Journal:  J Mother Child       Date:  2020-07-29

Review 9.  [Imaging Findings of Gastrointestinal Emergency in Infants and Young Children].

Authors:  Ji Young Kim
Journal:  Taehan Yongsang Uihakhoe Chi       Date:  2020-07-30
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.