A comparison of the success rate of pneumatic reduction in intussusception between general anesthesia and deep sedation: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: This study was aimed to compare the success rate between patients who underwent general anesthesia and deep sedation. METHODS: Patients who were diagnosed with intussusception and had no contraindications would receive non-operative treatment first by undergoing pneumatic reduction. The patients were then split in to two groups: one group underwent general anesthesia (GA group), while the other underwent deep sedation (SD group). This study was a randomized controlled trial which compared success rate between two groups. RESULTS: A total of 49 episodes diagnosed with intussusception were random into 25 episodes in GA group and 24 episodes in SD group. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristic between the two groups. The success rates of GA group and SD group were equally 88.0% (p = 1.00). Sub-analysis of the success rate was lower in the patients with high-risk score for failed reduction. (Chiang Mai University Intussusception (CMUI) failed score in success VS failed = 6.9 ± 3.2 vs. 10.3 ± 3.0 p = 0.017). CONCLUSION: General anesthesia and deep sedation offered similar success rates. In cases of high risk of failure, general anesthesia should be considered to accommodate the switch to surgical management in the same setting if the non-operative approach fails. The appropriate treatment and sedative protocol also increase the success of reduction.

Development of Clinical Referral Score Model for Early Diagnosis of Hirschsprung's Disease in Suspected Pediatric Patients.

The diagnosis of Hirschsprung's disease (HSCR) relies on history, physical examination, and investigations. Some of investigation modalities could not be done in primary hospital. This study was aimed to develop the clinical score model for diagnosing and early referrals of HSCR, especially in areas where investigations were not available. Overall 483 consecutive suspected HSCR patients who were under 15 years old from January 2006 to December 2020 were included in this study, with 207 (42.86%) patients diagnosed with HSCR and 276 (51.14%) patients in the non-HSCR group. Five clinical parameters were included in the prediction model. The AuROC of clinical parameters, which included having an age younger than one month, male gender, the term infant, history of delayed meconium passage, and history of enterocolitis, was 72%. The prediction score ranged from 0-7, with a score 0-3 meaning a low risk to be HSCR (LHR+ = 0.37). We concluded that patients with suspected HSCR who had clinical score 4-7 had a high probability to be HSCR and, thus, it was suggested that these patients have an early referral for further investigations, which were contrast enema and rectal suction biopsy. In the case of a low probability of HSCR, clinical observation is still warranted. This clinical scoring system can be used as a screening tool to prevent delay diagnosis and complications.

Enema reduction of intussusception: the success rate of hydrostatic and pneumatic reduction.

PURPOSE: Intussusception is a common surgical emergency in infants and children. The incidence of intussusception is from one to four per 2,000 infants and children. If there is no peritonitis, perforation sign on abdominal radiographic studies, and nonresponsive shock, nonoperative reduction by pneumatic or hydrostatic enema can be performed. The purpose of this study was to compare the success rates of both the methods. METHODS: Two institutional retrospective cohort studies were performed. All intussusception patients (ICD-10 code K56.1) who had visited Chiang Mai University Hospital and Siriraj Hospital from January 2006 to December 2012 were included in the study. The data were obtained by chart reviews and electronic databases, which included demographic data, symptoms, signs, and investigations. The patients were grouped according to the method of reduction followed into pneumatic reduction and hydrostatic reduction groups with the outcome being the success of the reduction technique. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy episodes of intussusception occurring in the patients of Chiang Mai University Hospital and Siriraj Hospital were included in this study. The success rate of pneumatic reduction was 61% and that of hydrostatic reduction was 44% (P=0.036). Multivariable analysis and adjusting of the factors by propensity scores were performed; the success rate of pneumatic reduction was 1.48 times more than that of hydrostatic reduction (P=0.036, 95% confidence interval [CI] =1.03-2.13). CONCLUSION: Both pneumatic and hydrostatic reduction can be performed safely according to the experience of the radiologist or pediatric surgeon and hospital setting. This study showed that pneumatic reduction had a higher success rate than hydrostatic reduction.