Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does the length of the history influence the outcome of pneumatic reduction of intussusception in children?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Surgery International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Intussusception is the most common cause of acute abdomen in infants and preschool children. Nonoperative reduction using air enema is an established treatment in children with intussusception. The aim of this study was to determine whether length of the history influences the outcome of pneumatic reduction of intussusception in children?

Methods

The medical records of 256 consecutive children with intussusception between July 1998 and June 2010, who underwent air enema reduction regardless of the length of the history were reviewed. In all 256 patients, intussusception was confirmed by ultrasound before proceeding to air enema.

Results

The length of history ranged from 2 to 240 h with median time of 18.5 h. The median age in 256 patients was 7 months (range 1 day to 12 years). The presenting clinical features included irritability/abdominal pain (77%), vomiting (80%), bleeding per rectum (36%) and palpable abdominal mass (50%). Air enema reduction was successful in 234 (91.5%) of the 256 patients. In 22 (8.5%) patients, air enema failed to reduce the intussusception and 3 (1.1%) of these patients had colonic perforation during the procedure. All 22 patients required surgery. The duration of symptoms did not influence the outcome of pneumatic reduction. 37 (14%) patients developed recurrence after successful pneumatic reduction of intussusception, with 58% presenting within 48 h of the initial procedure.

Conclusion

Our data suggest that pneumatic reduction should be first-line treatment in all children with intussusception regardless of the length of the history.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Justice FA, Auldist AW, Bines JE (2006) Intussusception: trends in clinical presentation and management. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 21(5):842–846

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Grosfeld JL (2005) Intussusception then and now: a historical vignette. J Am Coll Surg 201(6)

  3. Davis CF, McCabe AJ, Raine PAM (2003) The ins and outs of intussusception: history and management over the past fifty years. J Pediatr Surg 38(Suppl 7):60–64

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Macdonald I, Beattie T (1995) Intussusception presenting to a paediatric accident and emergency department. J Accid Emerg Med 12:182–186

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Harrington L, Connolly B, Hu X, Wesson DE, Babyn P, Schuh S (1998) Ultrasonographic and clinical predictors of intussusception. J Pediatr 132:836–839

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lehnert T, Sorge I, Till H, Rolle U (2009) Intussusception in children—clinical presentation, diagnosis and management. Int J Colorectal Dis 24:1187–1192

    Google Scholar 

  7. Justice F, Auldist A, Bines J (2006) Intussusception: trends in clinical presentation and management. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 21:842–846

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McDermott VG, Taylor T, Mackenzie S, Hendry GMA (2009) Pneumatic reduction of intussusception: clinical experience and factors affecting outcome. Clin Radiol 64(7):655–663

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Saxena AK, Höllwarth ME (2007) Factors influencing management and comparison of outcomes in paediatric intussusceptions. Acta Paediatr 96(8):1199–1202

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ramachandran P, Gupta A, Vincent P, Sridharan S (2008) Air enema for intussusception: is predicting the outcome important? Pediatr Surg Int 24(3):311–313

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Gorenstein A, Raucher A, Serour F, Witzling M, Katz R (1998) Intussusception in children: reduction with repeated, delayed air enema. Radiology 206:721–724

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rubi I, Vera R, Rubi SC, Torres EE et al (2002) Air reduction of intussusception. Eur J Pediatr Surg 12(6):387–390

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Shapkina AN, Shapkin VV, Nelubov IV, Pryanishena LT (2006) Intussusception in children: 11-year experience in Vladivostok. Pediatr Surg Int 22(11):901–904

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Guo JZ, Ma XY, Zhou QH (1986) Results of air pressure enema reduction of intussusception: 6,396 cases in 13 years. J Pediatr Surg 21:1201–1203

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Stein M, Alton DJ, Daneman A (1992) Pneumatic reduction of intussusception: 5-year experience. Radiology 183:681–684

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Blanch A, Perel S, Acworth P (2007) Paediatric intussusception: epidemiology and outcome emergency medicine Australasia 19:45–50

    Google Scholar 

  17. Champoux AN, Del Beccaro MA, Nazar-Stewart V (1994) Recurrent intussusceptions: risks and features. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 148:474–478

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Fecteau A, Flageole H, Nguyen LT, Laberge J-M, Shaw KS, Guttman FM (1996) Recurrent intussusception: Safe use of hydrostatic enema. J Pediatr Surg 31(6):859–861

    Google Scholar 

  19. Daneman A, Navarro O (2004) Intussusception. Part 2: an update on the evolution of management. Pediatr Radiol 34:97–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ko HS, Schenk JP, Tröger J, Rohrschneider WK (2007) Current radiological management of intussusception in children. Eur Radiol 17(9):2411–2421

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Children’s University Hospital, Temple Street, Dublin 1, Ireland

    Farhan Tareen, Stephanie Ryan, Stefano Avanzini, Victor Pena, Danielle Mc Laughlin & Prem Puri

  2. National Children’s Research Centre, Our Lady’s Children’s Hospital, Dublin 12, Ireland

    Prem Puri

Authors
  1. Farhan Tareen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephanie Ryan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stefano Avanzini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Victor Pena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Danielle Mc Laughlin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Prem Puri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Prem Puri.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tareen, F., Ryan, S., Avanzini, S. et al. Does the length of the history influence the outcome of pneumatic reduction of intussusception in children?. Pediatr Surg Int 27, 587–589 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-010-2836-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-010-2836-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation