Back to Journals » Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management » Volume 12

Prognostic indicators for failed nonsurgical reduction of intussusception

Authors Khorana J, Singhavejsakul J, Ukarapol N, Laohapensang M, Siriwongmongkol J, Patumanond J

Received 10 April 2016

Accepted for publication 17 June 2016

Published 9 August 2016 Volume 2016:12 Pages 1231—1237

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S109785

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Dr Hoa Le

Peer reviewer comments 3

Editor who approved publication: Professor Garry Walsh

Jiraporn Khorana,1 Jesda Singhavejsakul,1 Nuthapong Ukarapol,2 Mongkol Laohapensang,3 Jakraphan Siriwongmongkol,1 Jayanton Patumanond4

1Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, 2Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Pediatrics, Chiang Mai University Hospital, Chiang Mai, 3Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, 4Center of Excellence in Applied Epidemiology, Thammasat University Hospital, Pathumthani, Thailand

Purpose: To identify the risk factors for failure of nonsurgical reduction of intussusception.
Methods: Data from intussusception patients who were treated with nonsurgical reduction in Chiang Mai University Hospital and Siriraj Hospital between January 2006 and December 2012 were collected. Patients aged 0–15 years and without contraindications (peritonitis, abdominal X-ray signs of perforation, and/or hemodynamic instability) were included for nonsurgical reduction. The success and failure groups were divided according to the results of the reduction. Prognostic indicators for failed reduction were identified by using generalized linear model for exponential risk regression. The risk ratio (RR) was used to report each factor.
Results: One hundred and ninety cases of intussusception were enrolled. Twenty cases were excluded due to contraindications. A total of 170 cases of intussusception were included for the final analysis. The significant risk factors for reduction failure clustered by an age of 3 years were weight <12 kg (RR =1.48, P=0.004), symptom duration >3 days (RR =1.26, P<0.001), vomiting (RR =1.63, P<0.001), rectal bleeding (RR =1.50, P<0.001), abdominal distension (RR =1.60, P=0.003), temperature >37.8°C (RR =1.51, P<0.001), palpable abdominal mass (RR =1.26, P<0.001), location of mass (left over right side) (RR =1.48, P<0.001), poor prognostic signs on ultrasound scans (RR =1.35, P<0.001), and method of reduction (hydrostatic over pneumatic) (RR =1.34, P=0.023). The prediction ability of this model was 82.21% as assessed from the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.
Conclusion: The identified prognostic factors for the nonsurgical reduction failure may help to predict the reduction outcome and provide information to the parents.

Keywords: intussusception, pneumatic reduction, hydrostatic reduction, prognostic indicators, failure rate

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]

 

Other articles by this author:

Clinical prediction rules for failed nonoperative reduction of intussusception

Khorana J, Patumanond J, Ukarapol N, Laohapensang M, Visrutaratna P, Singhavejsakul J

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 2016, 12:1411-1416

Published Date: 13 September 2016

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

Khorana J, Singhavejsakul J, Ukarapol N, Laohapensang M, Wakhanrittee J, Patumanond J

Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management 2015, 11:1837-1842

Published Date: 15 December 2015