RESUMEN
Non-operative reduction has emerged as first line in the management of uncomplicated intussusception. The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of ultrasound-guided saline hydrostatic reduction and ultrasound-guided pneumatic reduction of intussusception in infants. This is a prospective study of infants with uncomplicated intussusception confirmed by ultrasound over a period of 21 months from December 2018 to August 2020. Fifty-two (69.3%) out of seventy-five infants were eligible and randomized based on simple random sampling technique into two groups: Group A included patients who had ultrasound-guided hydrostatic (saline) reduction; Group B included patients who had ultrasound-guided pneumatic (air) reduction. The success rates, time to reduction and complication rates were assessed. The success rates, between the saline hydrostatic reduction group and pneumatic reduction group, were comparable [17 (65.4%) versus 19 (73.1%); relative risk (RR) 0.8; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.6-1.2; p = 0.54]. The mean time to reduction was higher in the saline hydrostatic reduction group (15.4 ± 5.1 min versus 10.8 ± 4.1 min; p = 0.003). There was no statistically significant difference in the perforation and recurrence rates between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Saline hydrostatic reduction and pneumatic reduction of uncomplicated intussusception under ultrasound guidance in infants might have comparable outcomes. However, pneumatic reduction may be faster. WHAT IS KNOWN: ⢠Ileocolic intussusception is the most common cause of intestinal obstruction in infants. ⢠Ultrasonography is useful in the diagnosis and non-operative treatment of ileocolic intussusception. WHAT IS NEW: ⢠Ultrasound-guided hydrostatic enema and ultrasound-guided pneumatic enema are similarly effective and safe techniques in the reduction of ileocolic intussusception. ⢠Reduction of ileocolic intussusception under ultrasound guidance is a great technique that may prove useful in the developing world due to lower cost of required equipment.