Comparative Study between Ultrasound-Guided and Laparoscopic-Guided Hydrostatic Reduction of Pediatric Intussusception: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Document Type : Original Article

10.21608/ejhm.2025.453468

Abstract

Background: Ileocolic intussusception is the highly prevalent reason of intestinal obstruction in children < 2 years.  In the majority, ileocolic intussusception treatment involves imaging-guided hydrostatic or pneumatic reduction.


Objective: This study aimed to evaluate laparoscopic-guided hydrostatic reduction (LGHR) and ultrasound-guided hydrostatic reduction (UGHR) safety and efficacy in management of pediatric intussusception.


Methods: This randomized clinical prospective trial enrolled 60 children who had intussusception at General Surgery Department, Tanta University Hospitals. By employing a computer-generated list of random numbers, they were divided randomly into two equal groups of patients. Group A had USGHR and group B had LGHR. Comprehensive clinical examination, laboratory investigations, and history-taking were done to all patients.


Results: Regarding the outcome, the oral feeding was significantly earlier in group A (USGHR group) than in group B (LGHR group) (8.97± 2.04 hrs. vs. 17.37± 3.2 hrs. P<0.001). The successful reduction rate (96.67% vs. 90%) and recurrence rate within 24 h (3.33% vs. 6.67%) were insignificantly different between both groups. No mortality was reported in the current study.


Conclusions: We concluded that USGHR is a harmless, effective, and less invasive approach for pediatric intussusception management compared to LGHR. The success rate was insignificantly different but USGHR associated with short hospital stays, earlier initiation of feeding and less complications. However, LGHR, despite being slightly less successful overall in this study, had provided unique advantages.

Keywords