Tricia Denise Estabillo

BSN-2

Title: "Ultrasound-guided hydrostatic reduction versus fluoroscopy-guided air reduction for

pediatric intussusception"

Bibliography: Liu, S. T., Tang, X. B., et al (2021, January 13). Ultrasound-guided hydrostatic

reduction versus fluoroscopy-guided air reduction for pediatric intussusception: A multi-

center, prospective, cohort study - world journal of emergency surgery. BioMed Central.

Retrieved April 10, 2023, from https://wjes.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13017-

020-00346-9#citeas

Summary:

Intussusception is the most common abdominal emergency in children. The first line treatment

of uncomplicated pediatric intussusception is enema reduction. Until now, no multi-center

studies have compared the effectiveness and safety of UGHR and FGAR in the treatment of

pediatric intussusception. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of

the two most commonly used enema methods of pediatric intussusception: ultrasound-guided

hydrostatic reduction (UGHR) and fluoroscopy-guided air reduction (FGAR).

Reaction:

Based on the study The success and recurrence rates in the UGHR group were higher than in

the FGAR group. This means the Ultrasound-guided hydrostatic reduction is better than the

fluoroscopy-guided air reduction in terms of management.

UGHR and FGAR are safe, nonsurgical treatment methods for acute pediatric intussusception.
UGHR is superior to FGAR, with no radiation risk, and its success rate is higher, without a

difference in perforation rate, especially for patients aged 4–24 months.

according to onset time and demonstrates that UGHR is more effective than FGAR for

intussusception cases in the 12 h to 24 h group, while has no inferior efficacy to FGAR in other

groups. And it is considered that UGHR is more suitable than FGAR for intussusception

patients with onset time between 12 and 24 h.