Outcomes in pediatric patients with documented delays between ileocolic intussusception diagnosis and therapeutic enema attempt: evaluation of reduction efficacy and complication rate

Williams, Jennifer L.; Woodward, Connor; Royall, Ivey; Varich, Laura; Dennison, Chelsea; Lindsay, Aaron P.; Du, Youwei; Ruchman, Richard B.

doi:10.1007/s10140-022-02079-5

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results are concordant with similar research recently published by Williams et al [ 13 ]. Those authors assessed the morbidity and frequency of ileocolic intussusception reduction success rate in patients with different durations of delay between intussusception diagnosis and fluoroscopic enema reduction.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

“…There is contradictory data on whether ileocolic intussusception reduction should be performed emergently (as soon as possible) or urgently (delayed a few hours until optimal support staff is available). Some studies have found no impact on pneumatic or enema reduction success with delays up to 48 h after symptom onset [ 11 – 13 ], while other authors report increased probability of a surgical intervention following delays in image-guided interventions [ 2 , 10 , 14 , 15 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of a 6–12-h delay between ileocolic intussusception diagnostic US and fluoroscopic reduction on patients’ outcomes

Lopez-Rippe,

Davis,

Dennis

et al. 2024

Pediatr Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Image-guided reduction of intussusception is considered a radiologic urgency requiring 24-h radiologist and technologist availability. Objective To assess whether a delay of 6–12 h between US diagnosis and fluoroscopic reduction of ileocolic intussusception affects the success frequency of fluoroscopic reduction. Materials and methods Retrospective review of 0–5-year-olds undergoing fluoroscopic reduction for ileocolic intussusception from 2013 to 2023. Exclusions were small bowel intussusception, self-reduced intussusception, first fluoroscopic reduction attempt>12 h after US, prior bowel surgery, inpatient status, and patient transferred for recurrent intussusception. Data collected included demographics, symptoms, air/contrast enema selection, radiation dose, reduction failure, 48-h recurrence, surgery, length of stay, and complications. Comparisons between<6-h and 6–12-h delays after ultrasound diagnosis were made using chi-square, Fisher’s exact test, and Mann–Whitney U tests (P< 0.05 considered significant). Results Of 438 included patients, 387 (88.4%) were reduced in <6 h (median age 1.4 years) and 51 (11.7%) were reduced between 6 and 12 h (median age 2.05 years), with median reduction times of 1:42 and 7:07 h, respectively. There were no significant differences between the groups for reduction success (<6 h 87.3% vs. 6–12 h 94.1%; P-value = 0.16), need for surgery (<6 h 11.1% vs. 6–12 h 3.9%; P-value=0.112), recurrence of intussusception within 48 h after reduction (<6 h 9.3% vs. 6–12 h 15.7%; P-value=0.154), or length of hospitalization (<6 h 21:07 h vs. 6–12 h 20:03 h; P-value=0.662). Conclusion A delay of 6–12 h between diagnosis and fluoroscopic reduction of ileocolic intussusception is not associated with reduced fluoroscopic reduction success, need for surgical intervention after attempted reduction, recurrence of intussusception following successful reduction, or hospitalization duration after reduction. Graphical Abstract

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%