A randomized trial of pneumatic reduction versus hydrostatic reduction for intussusception in pediatric patients.

OBJECTIVES

Data of randomly controlled trials comparing the hydrostatic and pneumatic reduction for intussusception in pediatric patients as initial therapy are lacking. The aim of this study was to conduct a randomly controlled trial to compare the effectiveness and safety of the hydrostatic and pneumatic reduction techniques.

STUDY

DESIGN

All intussusception patients who visited West China Hospital of Sichuan University from January 2014 to December 2015 were enrolled in this study in which they underwent pneumatic reduction or hydrostatic reduction. Patients were randomized into ultrasound-guided hydrostatic or X-ray-guided pneumatic reduction group. The data collected includes demographic data, symptoms, signs, and investigations. The primary outcome of the study was the success rate of reduction. And the secondary outcomes of the study were the rates of intestinal perforations and recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 124 children with intussusception who had met the inclusion criteria were enrolled. The overall success rate of this study was 90.32%. Univariable analysis showed that the success rate of hydrostatic reduction with normal saline (96.77%) was significantly higher than that of pneumatic reduction with air (83.87%) (p=0.015). Perforation after reduction was found in only one of the pneumatic reduction group. The recurrence rate of intussusception in the hydrostatic reduction group was 4.84% compared with 3.23% of pneumatic reduction group.

CONCLUSION

Our study found that ultrasound-guided hydrostatic reduction is a simple, safe and effective nonoperative treatment for pediatric patients suffering from intussusceptions, and should be firstly adopted in the treatment of qualified patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study TYPE OF STUDY: Prospective study.