Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Early recurrence of ileocolic intussusception after successful air enema reduction: incidence and predisposing factors

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

Abstract

Purposes

Early recurrent ileocolic intussusception (RICI) is a rare event. We aimed to estimate the rate of RICI and identify predisposing factors for early recurrence for children treated in a tertiary-care academic medical center.

Methods

Consecutive children who were diagnosed with ileocolic intussusception (ICI) during the years 2005–2015 and had successful enema reduction were included. Demographic, clinical, imaging, and laboratory data were recorded for analysis. Ultrasound and fluoroscopy images were reviewed. Early RICI was defined as recurrence within 48 h.

Results

Two hundred forty-five episodes of intussusception in 210 patients, ages 2 to 77 months (mean 12.7), were included. Six patients (2.45%) had a RICI between 7 and 28 h (mean 17 h) after initial successful reduction. A total of 5/6 recurrences (83.3%) were in winter months. In the group without early recurrence, only 19.6% of the cases presented during the winter (p = 0.001). Mean age in the early recurrence group was 23 months compared to 12.4 months children with no early recurrence (p = 0.016). All other analyzed parameters were comparable for the groups.

Conclusion

Early RICI is a relatively rare event that may not justify routine admission and long observation. The approach should be individual, based on the clinical picture.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fleisher GR, Ludwig S (2006) Textbook of pediatric emergency medicine, 5th edn. Lippincot, Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  2. Eklöf O, Reiter S (1978) Recurrent intussusception analysis of a series treated with hydrostatic reduction. Acta Radiol Diagn 19:250–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Lui KW, Wong HF, Cheung YC, See LC, Ng KK, Kong MS, Wan YL (2001) Air enema for diagnosis and reduction of intussusception in children: clinical experience and fluoroscopy time correlation. J Pediatr Surg 36:479–481

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Daneman A, Alton DJ, Lobo E, Gravett J, Kim P, Ein SH (1998) Patterns of recurrence of intussusception in children: a 17-year review. Pediatr Radiol 8:913–919

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chien M, Willyerd FA, Mandeville K, Hostetler MA, Bulloch B (2013) Management of the child after enema-reduced intussusception: hospital or home? J Emerg Med 44:53–57

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bajaj L, Roback MG (2003) Postreduction management of intussusception in a children’s hospital emergency department. Pediatrics 112:1302–1307

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fecteau A, Flageole H, Nguyen LT, Laberge JM, Shaw KS, Guttman FM (1996) Recurrent intussusception: safe use of hydrostatic enema. J Pediatr Surg 31:859–861

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gilmore AW, Reed M, Tenenbein M (2011) Management of childhood intussusception after reduction by enema. Am J Emerg Med 29:1136–1140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wang Z, He QM, Zhang H, Zhong W, Xiao WQ, Lu LW, Yu JK, Xia HM (2015) Intussusception patients older than 1 year tend to have early recurrence after pneumatic enema reduction. Pediatr Surg Int 31:855–858

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Menor F, Cortina H, Marco A, Olague R (1992) Effectiveness of pneumatic reduction of ileocolic intussusception in children. Gastrointest Radiol 17:339–343

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kim JH, Lee JS, Ryu JM, Lim KS, Kim WY (2017) Risk factors for recurrent intussusception after fluoroscopy-guided air enema. Pediatr Emerg Care:1. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEC.0000000000001071

  12. Al-Jazaeri A, Yazbeck S, Filiatrault D, Beaudin M, Emran M, Bütter A (2006) Utility of hospital admission after successful enema reduction of ileocolic intussusception. J Pediatr Surg 41:1010–1013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Eshel G, Barr J, Heiman E, Bistritzer T, Broide E, Klin B, Aladjem M (1997) Incidence of recurrent intussusception following barium versus air enema. Acta Paediatr 86:545–546

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Ein SH (1975) Recurrent intussusception in children. J Pediatr Surg 10:751–755

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Le Masne A, Lortat-Jacob S, Sayegh N, Sannier N, Brunelle F, Cheron G (1999) Intussusception in infants and children: feasibility of ambulatory management. Eur J Pediatr 158:707–710

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Raval MV, Minneci PC, Deans KJ, Kurtovic KJ, Dietrich A, Bates DG, Rangel SJ, Moss RL, Kenney BD (2015) Improving quality and efficiency for intussusception management after successful enema reduction. Pediatrics 136:1345–1352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gray MP, Li SH, Hoffmann RG, Gorelick MH (2014) Recurrence rates after intussusception enema reduction: a meta-analysis. Pediatrics 134:110–119

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lioubashevsky N, Hiller N, Rozovsky K, Segev L, Simanovsky N (2013) Ileocolic versus small-bowel intussusception in children: can US enable reliable differentiation? Radiology 269:266–271

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Daneman A, Navarro O (2004) Intussusception part 2: an update on the evolution of management. Pediatr Radiol 34:97–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Jiang J, Jiang B, Parashar U, Nguyen T, Bines J, Patel MM (2013) Childhood intussusception: a literature review. PLoS One 8:e68482

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Serayssol C, Abbo O, Mouttalib S, Claudet I, Labarre D, Galinier P, Bouali O (2014) Seasonal pattern of intussusceptions in infants and children: is fall/winter predominance still worth consideration? A 10-year retrospective epidemiological study. Arch Pediatr 21:476–482

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Champoux AN, Del Beccaro MA, Nazar-Stewart V (1994) Recurrent intussusception risks and features. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 148:474–478

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Justice FA, Nguyen LT, Tran SN, Kirkwood CD, Thi NT, Carlin JB, Bines JE (2011) Recurrent intussusception in infants. J Paediatr Child Health 47:802–805

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Niramis R, Watanatitan S, Kruatrachue A, Anuntkosol M, Buranakitjaroen V, Rattanasuwan T, Wongtapradit L, Tongsin A (2010) Management of recurrent intussusception: non-operative or operative reduction. J Ped Surg 45:2175–2180

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Imaging, Hadassah Medical Center, Hadassah Hebrew University, PO Box 24035, Mount Scopus, 91240, Jerusalem, Israel

    Natalia Simanovsky, Omer Issachar, Benjamin Koplewitz, N. Lev-Cohain & Nurith Hiller

  2. Pediatric Emergency Department, Hadassah Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel

    D. Rekhtman

Authors
  1. Natalia Simanovsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Omer Issachar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Benjamin Koplewitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. N. Lev-Cohain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. D. Rekhtman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nurith Hiller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Natalia Simanovsky.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study formal consent is not required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Simanovsky, N., Issachar, O., Koplewitz, B. et al. Early recurrence of ileocolic intussusception after successful air enema reduction: incidence and predisposing factors. Emerg Radiol 26, 1–4 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-018-1635-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10140-018-1635-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation