ArticlePediatric surgery international2026
Effectiveness of ultrasound-guided hydrostatic versus fluoroscopy-guided air reduction for pediatric intussusception: a severity-adjusted cohort analysis.
Article 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe comparative effectiveness of fluoroscopy-guided air reduction (FGAR) versus ultrasound-guided hydrostatic reduction (UGHR) for pediatric intussusception remains uncertain, especially when clinical and sonographic severity are considered.
objectiveTo compare the effectiveness and safety of FGAR and UGHR after adjusting for disease severity and to identify independent predictors of non-operative reduction failure.
methodsA retrospective cohort of 192 children (0-24 months) with ileocolic intussusception treated between 2018 and 2024 was analyzed. Baseline clinical variables and ultrasound markers were collected. Multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for clinical and sonographic severity markers (symptom duration, anal protruding mass, intussusceptum length, and trapped fluid), identified predictors of failure, with model performance assessed using the area under the ROC curve.
resultsChildren undergoing UGHR presented with more severe disease, including longer symptom duration (34 vs. 22 h; p = 0.01), higher delayed presentation > 48 h (32.1% vs. 15.0%; p = 0.004), and more trapped fluid (30.4% vs. 16.3%; p = 0.02). Initial success was 86.3% for FGAR and 77.7% for UGHR (p = 0.12); however, the UGHR group had significantly more trapped fluid and longer symptom duration at baseline. After adjustment for these and other severity markers, technique was not associated with failure (aOR 1.22, 95% CI 0.64-2.28; p = 0.54). Independent predictors included longer symptom duration (aOR 1.27 per 12 h; p < 0.001), anal protruding mass (aOR 3.58; p = 0.01), greater intussusceptum length (aOR 1.41 per cm; p < 0.001), and trapped fluid (aOR 3.47; p < 0.001). Model discrimination was excellent (AUC 0.85). Perforation rates were similarly low (1.3% FGAR vs. 0.9% UGHR).
conclusionAfter adjusting for disease severity, UGHR and FGAR show equivalent effectiveness and safety. Crude differences reflect more severe presentations in the UGHR group. Severity markers-including symptom duration, trapped fluid, and intussusceptum length-are strong predictors of failure and should guide clinical decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42627511What 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.