RESUMEN
Intussusception is one of the most common causes of acute intestinal obstruction in infancy and early childhood. Most cases of intussusception tend to occur in infancy, between the ages of four and six months. The causes can be split into two categories: non-pathologic and pathologic. Non-pathological causes include administration of the rotavirus vaccine, dehydration, and recent illness. Pathological causes can be attributed to Meckel's diverticulum (in 75% of cases), polyps (15%), and lymphoma or other tumors (3%). Intussusception rarely occurs in infants less than three months of age. If intussusception does occur in patients under three months of age, the cause is idiopathic in up to 75% of the cases. Additionally, myoglandular-type polyps are exceedingly rare and very rarely occur in patients under the age of 50. This case report discusses the diagnosis and treatment of intussusception in a two-month-old male patient who initially presented to the pediatric inpatient unit for dehydration secondary to a suspected viral illness, later developing colicky abdominal pain and bloody stools. He was found to have colo-colonic intussusception with a myoglandular-type polyp lead point. In discussing this case, the aim is to teach about intussusception and myoglandular-type polyps, as well as reveal a rarity in both etiologies for this age group.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids (CS) are widely used to treat Crohn's disease (CD) and ulcerative colitis (UC), but are not recommended as maintenance therapy. Biologic drugs are widely used as an alternative to or in conjunction with CS to induce and maintain remission. This meta-analysis tested the hypothesis that CS use is associated with differential response to biologics. METHODS: We identified published placebo-controlled clinical trials of biologic drugs approved for the treatment of CD or UC. Pooled estimates of the risk difference (RD) and 95% confidence intervals were derived from random effects models for induction of response and remission and maintenance of remission comparing biologic with CS versus biologic alone. Heterogeneity of response was estimated using I2. RESULTS: Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Pooled estimates of the RD and I2 comparing biologic plus CS versus biologic alone were as follows: induction of UC response 0.15 (0.05, 0.25), I2 = 57.29% and CD response 0.02 (- 0.03, 0.06), I2 = 0.01%; induction of UC remission 0.03 (- 0.01, 0.08), I2 = 0.00% and CD remission 0.08(0.02, 0.14), I2 = 7.81%; and maintenance of UC remission - 0.06 (- 0.13, 0.01), I2 = 0.00% and CD remission - 0.06 (- 0.14, 0.03), I2 = 11.24%. Patients in the placebo arm of CD trials who were receiving CS were less likely to achieve remission during the induction phase (pooled RD - 0.05 (- 0.09, - 0.00), I2 = 0.00%). CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials, CS use was associated with higher biologic response rates for UC and remission rates for CD during the induction phase, but were not associated with improved maintenance of remission.