Sedative reduction method for children with intussusception.

Intussusception is common emergency condition in children. Pneumatic or hydrostatic reduction (HR) is considered the first-choice management strategy in cases lacking indications for surgical intervention. Generally, sedatives are not used in children undergoing interventional radiology procedures. Surgical management is associated with long hospitalization durations and high costs, unlike nonsurgical reduction. To avoid surgery, reduction procedures are repeated despite initial treatment failure. However, in cases involving repeated failures, children should be referred for surgery.To ensure good response to reduction, we planned HR under sedation during the third reduction attempt. Sedative reduction (SR) was performed with the administration of ketamine, midazolam, and atropine. All patients with contraindications against HR underwent laparoscopic reduction (LR) without HR.During 3 years, SR was performed in 43 patients, and in 28 (65.1%), the treatment was successful. Among the 15 patients in whom the procedure failed, 14 underwent LR without intestinal resection. There was no significant risk factor contributing to failed reduction under sedation.During the second or third HR attempt, successful reduction may be ensured with the SR procedure with intravenous ketamine, midazolam, and atropine; this procedure may further reduce surgery rates in pediatric intussusception.

Influence of valproate on language functions in children with epilepsy.

The aim of the current study was to assess the influences of valproate (VPA) on the language functions in newly diagnosed pediatric patients with epilepsy. We reviewed medical records of 53 newly diagnosed patients with epilepsy, who were being treated with VPA monotherapy (n=53; 22 male patients and 31 female patients). The subjects underwent standardized language tests, at least twice, before and after the initiation of VPA. The standardized language tests used were The Test of Language Problem Solving Abilities, a Korean version of The Expressive/Receptive Language Function Test, and the Urimal Test of Articulation and Phonology. Since all the patients analyzed spoke Korean as their first language, we used Korean language tests to reduce the bias within the data. All the language parameters of the Test of Language Problem Solving Abilities slightly improved after the initiation of VPA in the 53 pediatric patients with epilepsy (mean age: 11.6±3.2years), but only "prediction" was statistically significant (determining cause, 14.9±5.1 to 15.5±4.3; making inference, 16.1±5.8 to 16.9±5.6; prediction, 11.1±4.9 to 11.9±4.2; total score of TOPS, 42.0±14.4 to 44.2±12.5). The patients treated with VPA also exhibited a small extension in mean length of utterance in words (MLU-w) when responding, but this was not statistically significant (determining cause, 5.4±2.0 to 5.7±1.6; making inference, 5.8±2.2 to 6.0±1.8; prediction, 5.9±2.5 to 5.9±2.1; total, 5.7±2.1 to 5.9±1.7). The administration of VPA led to a slight, but not statistically significant, improvement in the receptive language function (range: 144.7±41.1 to 148.2±39.7). Finally, there were no statistically significant changes in the percentage of articulation performance after taking VPA. Therefore, our data suggested that VPA did not have negative impact on the language function, but rather slightly improved problem-solving abilities.