ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2022
Fluoroscopic criteria for on-site evaluation of failed intussusception reduction during air enema technique.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is no reliable fluoroscopic criteria for failed intussusception reduction during air enema technique. Methods: This retrospective case-control study included 373 episodes of ileocolic intussusceptions who had undergone air enema under fluoroscopy. All procedures were initially classified by conventional fluoroscopic criteria: presumptive successful procedures (PSP) Results: PSP was 264 episodes (71%) and PFP was 109 episodes (29%). The true failure was 40 (37%) and false failure was 48 (44%). The true failure group commonly showed a larger size and round configuration for the residual mass than false failure (P<0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed configuration (P=0.004) and transverse diameter (P=0.007) as significant parameters that differentiated true and false failure. The optimal cut-off value of the transverse diameter of the residual mass was 2.3 cm. The sensitivity and specificity of conventional fluoroscopic criteria for failed reduction was 100% and 85%, respectively. The combination of new fluoroscopic findings and conventional criteria increased the specificity to 100%. Conclusions: Fluoroscopic finding of round-shape and larger size residual mass combined with conventional criteria may be useful for differentiating false failure from truly failed enema reduction in children with intussusception.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.