Hadidi A T, El Shal N
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Cairo University, Egypt.
J Pediatr Surg. 1999 Feb;34(2):304-7. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3468(99)90196-3.
A prospective study was conducted comparing air reduction, barium reduction under fluoroscopy, and saline reduction under ultrasound guidance for diagnosis and treatment of intussusception involved in 147 patients.
Fifty children received air reduction (AR group), 50 received barium enema reduction (BE group) and 47 received saline reduction under ultrasound guidance (US group). Nonoperative management was attempted if there was a history of less than 48 hours; absence of general or abdominal signs of toxicity, peritonism, or peritonitis, and reasonable blood electrolyte levels (K, 3 to 5 mmol/L; Na, 130 to 150 mmol/L).
Group AR had successful outcome in 45 of 50 children (90%); BE had successful outcome in 35 of 50 children (70%), and US had successful outcome in 32 of 47 children (67%). This 20% to 23% success rate difference between air reduction and the other two techniques (BE and US) was statistically significant (P = .01). There was no significant difference between BE and US saline (P > or = .05). There were no perforations encountered in AR patients, three perforations in BE patients, and two perforations in US patients. There was no mortality.
Air reduction seems to be associated with fewer complications and the highest success rate. Proper selection of patients is crucial to achieve a high success rate and to minimise complications.
进行一项前瞻性研究,比较空气灌肠复位、透视下钡剂灌肠复位和超声引导下生理盐水灌肠复位对147例肠套叠患者的诊断和治疗效果。
50例患儿接受空气灌肠复位(AR组),50例接受钡剂灌肠复位(BE组),47例接受超声引导下生理盐水灌肠复位(US组)。如果病史少于48小时;无全身或腹部中毒、腹膜炎或腹膜刺激征,且血液电解质水平合理(钾,3至5 mmol/L;钠,130至150 mmol/L),则尝试非手术治疗。
AR组50例患儿中有45例成功(90%);BE组50例患儿中有35例成功(70%),US组47例患儿中有32例成功(67%)。空气灌肠复位与其他两种技术(BE和US)之间20%至23%的成功率差异具有统计学意义(P = 0.01)。BE和US生理盐水灌肠复位之间无显著差异(P≥0.05)。AR组患者未发生穿孔,BE组患者发生3例穿孔,US组患者发生2例穿孔。无死亡病例。
空气灌肠复位似乎并发症较少且成功率最高。正确选择患者对于获得高成功率和减少并发症至关重要。