ArticlePediatric radiology2024
Intussusception reduction methods in daily practice-a survey by the European Society of Paediatric Radiology Abdominal Imaging Taskforce.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- European society of paediatric radiology abdominal task force procedural recommendations for intussusception reduction: what's the evidence?Pediatric radiology · 2026Review
- Repeated ultrasound-guided hydrostatic reduction for pediatric intussusception: attempt number, interval, and success.European journal of medical research · 2025Article
- Pain-related distress in children undergoing air enema reduction for ileocolic intussusception: a proof-of-concept case series.Pain reports · 2025Article
- Is sedation necessary for hydrostatic reduction in ileocolic intussusception? Evaluating procedural outcomes and parents' preferences.World journal of pediatric surgery · 2025Article
- ESPR 2023-Building new bridges from Belgrade.Pediatric radiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundImage-guided intussusception reduction has been practised internationally for many decades. The use of different modalities, delayed repeat attempts, and sedation/anaesthesia are unknown.
objectiveTo survey the practice of image-guided intussusception reduction. MATERIALS AND
methodsA 20-point questionnaire created by the European Society of Paediatric Radiology (ESPR) Abdominal Imaging Taskforce was distributed via the ESPR members' mailing list and shared on social media between 28 March and 1 May 2023.
resultsThere were 69 responses from 65 worldwide institutions, with a mean of 18 intussusception reductions performed per year: 55/69 (80%) from 52 European institutions and 14/69 (20%) from 13 institutions outside of Europe. European centres reported using 19/52 (37%) fluoroscopy, 18/52 (35%) ultrasound, and 15/52 (28%) a mixture of both, with 30/52 (58%) offering a delayed repeat at 15 min to 24 h. Non-European centres reported using 5/13 (39%) fluoroscopy, 6/13 ultrasound (46%), and 2/13 (15%) a mixture of both, with 9/13 (69%) offering a delayed repeat attempt. Sedation or analgesia was used in 35/52 (67%) of European and 2/13 (15%) non-European institutions.
conclusionThere is wide variation in how image-guided intussusception reduction is performed, and in the use of sedation/anaesthesia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37993547What 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.