Skip to main content
Log in

Interloop fluid in intussusception: what is its significance?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Sonography has been used to predict pneumatic reduction outcome in children with intussusception.

Objective

To assess the prognostic significance of fluid between the intussusceptum and intussuscepiens with respect to reduction outcome, lead point or necrosis.

Materials and methods

Sonograms of children with a discharge diagnosis of intussusception from four institutions were reviewed for interloop fluid and correlated with results of pneumatic reduction and surgical/pathological findings when available. Maximal dimension of interloop fluid on a transverse image and fluid complexity were evaluated.

Results

Of 166 cases, 36 (21.7%) had interloop fluid. Pneumatic reduction was successful in 21 (58.3%) with fluid and 113 (87.6%) without. The average largest fluid dimension was 8.7 mm (range 5 mm–19 mm, median 8 mm) in cases with successful reduction and 12.8 mm (range 4 mm–26 mm, median 12.5 mm) in unsuccessful reduction (p < 0.05). Fluid dimension equal to or greater than 9 mm correlated with failed reduction (p < 0.0001;odds ratio13:1). In 36 cases with interloop fluid that required surgery, there were four lead points and three necrosis. In cases without fluid with surgical reduction, there was one lead point and one necrosis. Interloop fluid correlated with lead point (p < 0.04) or necrosis (p < 0.03). Its significance increased with larger amounts of fluid (p < 0.0001). Patient age/fluid complexity did not correlate with reduction outcome (p = 0.9).

Conclusion

Interloop fluid was associated with increased failure of pneumatic reduction and increased likelihood of lead point or necrosis, particularly when the maximum dimension exceeded 9mm.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Swischuk LE, Stansberry SD (1991) Ultrasonographic detection of free peritoneal fluid in uncomplicated intussusception. Pediatr Radiol 21:350–351

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Britton I, Wilkinson AG (1999) Ultrasound features of intussusception predicting outcome of air enema. Pediatr Radiol 29:705–710

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Verschelden P, Filiatrault D, Garel L et al (1992) Intussusception in children: reliability of US in diagnosis-a prospective study. Radiology 184:741–744

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Lim HK, Bae SH, Lee KH et al (1994) Assessment of reducibility of ileocolic intussusception in children: usefulness of color Doppler sonography. Radiology 191:781–785

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Feinstein KA, Myers M, Fernbach SK et al (1993) Peritoneal fluid in children with intussusception: its sonographic detection and relationship to successful reduction. Abdom Imaging 18:277–279

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Wood SK, Kim JS, Suh SJ et al (1992) Childhood intussusception: US guided hydrostatic reduction. Radiology 182:77–80

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Koumanidou C, Vakaki M, Pitsoulakis G et al (2002) Sonographic detection of lymph nodes in the intussusception of infants and young children: clinical evaluation and hydrostatic reduction. AJR 178:445–450

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Stranzinger E, Dipietro MA, Yarram S et al (2009) Intramural and subserosal echogenic foci on US in large-bowel intussusceptions: prognostic indicator for reducibility? Pediatr Radiol 39:42–46

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Del-Pozo G, González-Spinola J, Gómez-Ansón B et al (1996) Intussusception: trapped peritoneal fluid detected with US—relationship to reducibility and ischemia. Radiology 201:379–386

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mirilas P, Koumanidou C, Vaakaki M et al (2001) Sonographic features indicative of hydrostatic reducibility of intestinal intussusception in infancy and early childhood. Eur Radiol 11:2576–2580

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kirks DR (1994) Diagnosis and treatment of pediatric intussusception: how far should we push our radiologic techniques? Radiology 191:622–623

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Navarro OM, Daneman A, Chae A (2004) Intussusception: the use of delayed, repeated reduction attempts and management of intussusceptions due to pathologic lead points in pediatric patients. AJR 182:1169–1176

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Terry L. Levin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gartner, R.D., Levin, T.L., Borenstein, S.H. et al. Interloop fluid in intussusception: what is its significance?. Pediatr Radiol 41, 727–731 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-010-1931-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-010-1931-0

Keywords

Navigation