Comparison of success rates in intussusception reduction in children: colonoscopy versus ultrasound-guided saline enema.

Q3 Medicine
Reyhaneh Naghizadeh, Ahmad Ali Davar, Alireza Teimouri, Manijeh Khalili, Mohadeseh Zadehmir
{"title":"Comparison of success rates in intussusception reduction in children: colonoscopy versus ultrasound-guided saline enema.","authors":"Reyhaneh Naghizadeh, Ahmad Ali Davar, Alireza Teimouri, Manijeh Khalili, Mohadeseh Zadehmir","doi":"10.22037/ghfbb.v18i2.3116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>This study evaluated and compared the success rates of intussusception reduction in children younger under three years of age using colonoscopy versus ultrasound-guided saline enema.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Intussusception involves telescoping one segment of the intestine into another.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This experimental study included 41 children under three years old who were diagnosed with intussusception via ultrasound and admitted for reduction treatment. Participants were randomly assigned to either the saline enema or colonoscopy intervention. Data analysis was conducted using Chi-square tests and independent T-tests, utilizing SPSS 23.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the 41 children, 16 underwent reduction via colonoscopy, achieving a success rate of 81.25% (13 out of 16). In contrast, the saline enema method demonstrated a success rate of 84% (21 out of 25). The difference in success rates between the two methods was not statistically significant. Factors such as gender, age, the location of intussusception (ileocolic vs. colocolic), and the size of the intussusception did not significantly influence the success rates for either approach. Notably, intra-abdominal free fluid was significantly associated with reduced success rates for the saline enema method (P = 0.044). At the same time, no such association was found for the colonoscopy method (P = 0.142). Additionally, the presence of lymphadenopathy between the invaginated segments significantly impacted the success of the saline enema method (P = 0.036) but did not affect colonoscopy outcomes (P = 0.375).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study concluded that there was no significant difference in the success rates of intussusception reductions between the colonoscopy and saline enema methods. Lymph nodes between invaginated loops and intraperitoneal fluid significantly decrease the success rate of saline enema reductions, suggesting that colonoscopy may be preferable in such cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":12636,"journal":{"name":"Gastroenterology and Hepatology From Bed to Bench","volume":"18 2","pages":"196-204"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12421923/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastroenterology and Hepatology From Bed to Bench","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22037/ghfbb.v18i2.3116","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: This study evaluated and compared the success rates of intussusception reduction in children younger under three years of age using colonoscopy versus ultrasound-guided saline enema.

Background: Intussusception involves telescoping one segment of the intestine into another.

Methods: This experimental study included 41 children under three years old who were diagnosed with intussusception via ultrasound and admitted for reduction treatment. Participants were randomly assigned to either the saline enema or colonoscopy intervention. Data analysis was conducted using Chi-square tests and independent T-tests, utilizing SPSS 23.

Results: Among the 41 children, 16 underwent reduction via colonoscopy, achieving a success rate of 81.25% (13 out of 16). In contrast, the saline enema method demonstrated a success rate of 84% (21 out of 25). The difference in success rates between the two methods was not statistically significant. Factors such as gender, age, the location of intussusception (ileocolic vs. colocolic), and the size of the intussusception did not significantly influence the success rates for either approach. Notably, intra-abdominal free fluid was significantly associated with reduced success rates for the saline enema method (P = 0.044). At the same time, no such association was found for the colonoscopy method (P = 0.142). Additionally, the presence of lymphadenopathy between the invaginated segments significantly impacted the success of the saline enema method (P = 0.036) but did not affect colonoscopy outcomes (P = 0.375).

Conclusion: The study concluded that there was no significant difference in the success rates of intussusception reductions between the colonoscopy and saline enema methods. Lymph nodes between invaginated loops and intraperitoneal fluid significantly decrease the success rate of saline enema reductions, suggesting that colonoscopy may be preferable in such cases.

儿童肠套叠复位成功率的比较:结肠镜检查与超声引导盐水灌肠。
目的:本研究评估并比较了三岁以下儿童使用结肠镜检查和超声引导盐水灌肠治疗肠套叠的成功率。背景:肠套叠涉及肠的一段延伸到另一段。方法:本实验研究纳入41例3岁以下经超声诊断为肠套叠并接受复位治疗的儿童。参与者被随机分配到盐水灌肠或结肠镜检查干预组。数据分析采用卡方检验和独立t检验,使用SPSS 23软件。结果:41例患儿中,结肠镜复位16例,成功率81.25%(13 / 16)。相比之下,盐水灌肠法的成功率为84%(25例中有21例)。两种方法的成功率差异无统计学意义。性别、年龄、肠套叠的位置(回肠结肠或结肠)以及肠套叠的大小等因素对两种入路的成功率都没有显著影响。值得注意的是,腹腔内游离液体与盐水灌肠法的成功率降低显著相关(P = 0.044)。同时,结肠镜检查方法没有发现这种关联(P = 0.142)。此外,内翻节段之间淋巴结病变的存在显著影响生理盐水灌肠方法的成功(P = 0.036),但不影响结肠镜检查结果(P = 0.375)。结论:结肠镜检查与生理盐水灌肠方法在肠套叠复位成功率上无显著差异。内陷环和腹腔内液之间的淋巴结显著降低盐水灌肠减少的成功率,提示在这种情况下结肠镜检查可能更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信