SynthesisPediatric surgery international2026
Ultrasound-guided hydrostatic enema reduction for intussusception in children younger than 12 months: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Pediatric surgery international, 2026. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesIntussusception is the most common cause of bowel obstruction in infancy and may lead to substantial morbidity. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated success, recurrence, and perforation rates of ultrasound-guided hydrostatic enema reduction (UGHR) in infants younger than 12 months.
methodsA systematic search was performed from database inception through January 2026. A random-effects model was applied to generate pooled estimates. Analyses, including subgroup analyses by sedation status, study design, and country income level, were conducted in R, and certainty of evidence was appraised.
resultsTwenty-two studies, including 2656 infants, met the inclusion criteria. The pooled success rate was 80%, the recurrence rate was 8%, and the perforation rate was 2%. Subgroup analysis demonstrated no significant effect of sedation status or study design on outcomes, whereas income level was significantly associated with perforation risk. Substantial heterogeneity was observed across outcomes. Overall certainty of evidence was low.
conclusionsUGHR demonstrates a clinically meaningful success rate with an acceptable safety profile in infants under 12 months, supporting its role as a safe and effective non-surgical treatment in hemodynamically stable patients. Standardized global protocols and high-quality prospective multicenter studies are needed to optimize outcomes and strengthen the evidence base.
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.