Intussusception treatment is routinely performed in our clinic using ultrasound -guided hydrostatic reduction (USGHR). Because of the difficulties seen in technique and its less-than-ideal success rate, alternative methods are searched. In this study, we would like to discuss using external manual reduction (EMR) in combination with USGHR in intussusception treatment. This retrospective study was completed in Pediatric Surgery Department of Van Training and Research Hospital, between February2018 and May 2018. Patients that treated with USGHR marked as Group 1 and Patients that treated with combination of USGHR and marked as Group 2. Patient age, gender, symptoms, treatment techniques, complications and hospitalization periods were noted. In Group 1; 14 patients were treated with a single session and 2 were treated with 2 sessions. 4 patients were treated with surgery. Mean reduction time was calculated as 16 minutes, the fluid volume required for each reduction was 84 ml/kg and mean hospitalization period was calculated as 33 hours. In Group 2; 18 out of 20 patients were treated in the first session and 2 required a secondary session. Mean reduction time was calculated as 13 minutes, the fluid volume required for reduction was 65 ml/kg and mean ho spitalization period was calculated as 25 hours. The results were statistically assessed by using SPSS version 24. Normality controls were done using Shapiro -Wilk Test. As an alternative; USGHR supported by EMR can be beneficial in increasing the treatment success rate in intussusception treatment and decreasing negative laparotomy rates, especially in partial reduction cases.
___
1. Koh CC, Sheu JC, Wan NL, Lee HC, Chang PY, Yeh ML. Recurrent ileocolic intussusception after different surgical procedures in children. Pediatric surgery international 2006; 22: 725-728.
2. Vazquez JL, Ortiz M, Doniz MC, Montero M, Del Campo VM. External manual reduction of paediatric idiopathic ileocolic intussusception with US assistance: a new, standardised, effective and safe manoeuvre. Pediatric radiology 2012; 42: 1197-1204.
3. Chua JH, Chui CH, Jacobsen AS. Role of surgery in theera of highly successful air enema reduction of intussusception. AsianJournal of Surgery 2006; 29: 267-273.
4. Ocal S, Cevik M, Boleken M E, Karakas E. A comparison of manual versus hydrostatic reduction in children with intussusception: Singlecenterexperience. AfricanJournal of Paediatric Surgery 2014; 11: 184.
5. Korkmaz M, Yazgan H, Budan K, et al. Çocukluk çağı invajinasyon olgularında pnömatik redüksiyon sonuçları. Gaziantep Medical Journal 2012; 18: 56-60.
6. Esposito F, Ambrosio C, De Fronzo S, et al. Fluoroscopy-guided hydrostatic reduction of intussusception in infancy: role of pharmacological premedication.2015; La radiologia medica 2015; 120: 549-556.
7. Nayak D, Jagdish S. Ultrasound guided hydrostatic reduction of intussusception in children by saline enema: our experience. Indian Journal of Surgery 2008; 70: 8-13.
8. Mensah Y, Glover-Addy H, Etwire V, AppeaduMensah W, Twum M. Ultrasound guided hydrostatic reduction of intussusception in children at Korle Bu Teaching Hospital: an initial experience. Ghanamedical journal 2011; 45: 128.
9. Eisapour A, Mehrayin R, Esmaeili-Dooki M. TheEffect of Midazolam on Decreasing the Duration of Intussusception Hydrostatic Reduction in Children. Medical Archives 2015; 69: 289.
10. Bekdash B, Marven SS, Sprigg A. Reduction of intussusception: defining a better index of successful non-operative treatment. Pediatric radiology 2013; 43: 649-656.
11. Chan KL, Saing H, Peh WCG, et al. Childhood intussusception: ultrasound-guided Hartmann's solution hydrostatic reduction or barium enema reduction?. Journal of pediatric surgery 1997; 32: 3-6.
12. Frush DP, Zheng JY, McDermott VG, Bisset GS. Nonoperative treatment of intussusception: historical perspective. AJR. American journal of roentgenolog 1995; 165: 1066-1070.
13. Bai YZ, Qu RB, Da Wang G, et al. Ultrasoundguided hydrostatic reduction of intussusceptions by saline enema: a review of 5218 cases in 17 years. TheAmerican journal of surgery 2006; 192: 273-275.