Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27563245›Full record

ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2016

Prognostic indicators for failed nonsurgical reduction of intussusception.

Jiraporn Khorana, Jesda Singhavejsakul, Nuthapong Ukarapol, Mongkol Laohapensang, Jakraphan Siriwongmongkol, Jayanton Patumanond

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jiraporn KhoranaDivision of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery.
Jesda SinghavejsakulDivision of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery.
Nuthapong UkarapolDivision of Gastroenterology, Department of Pediatrics, Chiang Mai University Hospital, Chiang Mai.
Mongkol LaohapensangDivision of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok.
Jakraphan SiriwongmongkolDivision of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery.
Jayanton PatumanondCenter of Excellence in Applied Epidemiology, Thammasat University Hospital, Pathumthani, Thailand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo identify the risk factors for failure of nonsurgical reduction of intussusception.

methodsData 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.

resultsOne 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.

conclusionThe identified prognostic factors for the nonsurgical reduction failure may help to predict the reduction outcome and provide information to the parents.

Indexed as

failure ratehydrostatic reductionintussusceptionpneumatic reductionprognostic indicators

Identifiers

PMID27563245
PMCPMC4984823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.