The plain abdominal film in intussusception: The accuracy and incidence of radiographic signs

Ratcliffe, John W.; Fong, S.S.L; Cheong, Ian; O’Connell, P. Ronan

doi:10.1007/bf02011307

Cited by 32 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…25,26,38,40 In the present study, a highly suggestive abdominal radiograph was found to be an important independent predictor. Intussusception, however, also occurred in 21% of patients without highly suggestive radiographs, similar to what has been reported previously.…”

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 63%

“…The utility of plain radiographs in diagnosing intussusception has been the subject of controversy, with regard to their sensitivity and specificity 2,[24][25][26][36][37][38][39][40][41] as well as to interobserver reliability. 25,26,38,40 In the present study, a highly suggestive abdominal radiograph was found to be an important independent predictor.…”

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The radiographs were categorized as follows: (1) not suggestive of intussusception (normal bowel gas pattern and no signs of mass or obstruction), (2) moderately suggestive of intussusception (abnormal but nonspecific bowel gas pattern and no obvious mass or obstruction), and (3) highly suggestive of intussusception (soft tissue mass, evidence of bowel obstruction or a visible intussusceptum). 2,[24][25][26] In each case, contrast enema was performed using water-soluble contrast material (Gastrografin) by an attending pediatric radiologist. Patients were considered to have intussusception if the radiologist performing the contrast enema documented intussusception in the written report.…”

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Predictors of Intussusception in Young Children

Kuppermann¹,

O'Dea²,

Pinckney³

et al. 2000

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To identify predictors of intussusception in young children.Design: A retrospective cross-sectional study. Setting and Patients:A consecutive sample of children younger than 5 years on whom contrast enemas were performed because of suspected intussusception seen at an urban children's hospital from 1990 to 1995. Methods:We evaluated historical, clinical, and radiographic variables. Variables documented in 75% or more of the medical records and associated with intussusception (PՅ.20) in the univariate analysis were evaluated in a multiple logistic regression analysis. Variables retaining significance (PՅ.05) in the multivariate analysis were considered independent predictors of intussusception. We used bootstrap resampling techniques to validate the multivariate model.Results: Sixty-eight (59%) of the 115 patients had intussusception. Univariate predictors of intussusception included male sex, age younger than 2 years, history of emesis, rectal bleeding, lethargy, abdominal mass, and a highly suggestive abdominal radiograph. In the multivariate analysis, we identified only 4 independent predictors (adjusted odds ratio; 95% confidence interval): a highly suggestive abdominal radiograph (18.3; 4.0-83.1), rectal bleeding (17.3; 2.9-104.0), male sex (6.2; 1.2-32.3), and a history of emesis (13.4; 1.4-126.0). We identified 3 of these 4 variables (all but emesis) as independent predictors in more than 50% of 1000 bootstrap data samples.Conclusions: Rectal bleeding, a highly suggestive abdominal radiograph, and male sex are variables independently associated with intussusception in a cohort of children suspected of having this diagnosis. Knowledge of these variables may assist in clinical decision making regarding diagnostic and therapeutic interventions.Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2000;154:250-255

show abstract

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 63%

Section: Commentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Predictors of Intussusception in Young Children

Kuppermann¹,

O'Dea²,

Pinckney³

et al. 2000

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other possible features include soft tissue mass, target sign, or meniscus sign. 17 The first-line investigation for diagnosis of intussusception in children is abdominal ultrasound, given its high sensitivity (98%-100%) and specificity (88%-100%). 18 Non-operative reduction methods for intussusception include barium enema, and hydrostatic or pneumatic reduction.…”

Section: Implications For Clinical Practice or Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Childhood intussusception: 17-year experience at a tertiary referral centre in Hong Kong

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:To review all paediatric patients with intussusception over the last 17 years. Design: Retrospective case series.Setting: A tertiary centre in Hong Kong. Patients:Children who presented with intussusception from January 1997 to December 2014 were reviewed. Main outcome measures:The duration of symptoms, successful treatment modalities, complication rate, and length of hospital stay were studied.Results: A total of 173 children (108 male, 65 female) presented to our hospital with intussusception during the study period. Their median age at presentation was 12.5 months (range, 2 months to 16 years) and the mean duration of symptoms was 2.3 (standard deviation, 1.8) days. Vomiting was the most common symptom (76.3%) followed by abdominal pain (46.2%), per rectal bleeding or red currant jelly stool (40.5%), and a palpable abdominal mass (39.3%). Overall, 160 patients proceeded to pneumatic or hydrostatic reduction, among whom 127 (79.4%) were successful. Three (1.9%) patients had bowel perforation during the procedure. Early recurrence of intussusception occurred in four (3.1%) patients with non-operative reduction. No

show abstract

“…Another commonly described plain radiograph finding is "target sign" [3] which consists of two concentric circles of fat density to the right of the spine in infants and children. The target sign is described to be twice as frequent as that of the crescent sign.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%