[Acute intestinal invagination: hydrostatic reduction vs. pneumatic reduction]

Area of Science:

• Pediatric Gastroenterology
• Abdominal Radiology
• Minimally Invasive Surgery

Background:

• Intussusception is a common surgical emergency in infants and children.
• Traditional reduction methods include barium enema and surgery.
• Air enema (pneumocolon) has emerged as a less invasive alternative.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the efficacy of air enema reduction versus barium enema reduction for acute intussusception.
• To analyze the advantages and disadvantages of each method.

Main Methods:

• Retrospective analysis of 100 cases of acute intussusception.
• Treatment via controlled pressure air enema.
• Comparison with historical data of barium enema reduction.

Main Results:

• Successful reduction rates were 76% for barium enema and 88% for air enema.
• Air enema demonstrated significant advantages in terms of radiation exposure, cost, and morbidity.

Conclusions:

• Pneumocolon is a highly effective and safe alternative for treating acute intussusception.
• Air enema offers benefits of reduced radiation, lower cost, and decreased morbidity compared to barium enema.