INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE
Original Article
Apr 19, 2026 39 36

Ultrasound-Guided Versus Fluoroscopic Conservative Reduction of Intestinal Intussusception in Children: A Retrospective Comparative Study

Jamshid Shamsiev 1 * ,
Amine Ksia 2,
Azamat Shamsiev 3,
Kenan Karavdic 4,
Mahmoud El Fiky 5
1 Specialized Pediatric Surgical Clinic, Samarkand State Medical University, Samarkand, Uzbekistan2 Department of Pediatric Surgery, Faculty of Medicine of Monastir, University of Monastir, Monastir, Tunisia3 Department of Pediatric Surgery No. 1, Samarkand State Medical University (SamSMU), Samarkand, Uzbekistan4 Department of Surgical Disciplines, Faculty of Medicine, University of Sarajevo Clinical Center, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina5 Department of Surgery (Paediatric Surgery Unit), Kasr Al-Ainy Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt * Corresponding Author
International Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 1(1), 2026, jebm001, https://doi.org/10.63946/jebm/18437
Publication date: Apr 19, 2026
Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Intestinal intussusception is the most common form of acquired intestinal obstruction in childhood. Diagnostic errors reach 50%, and complications occur in up to 53.7% of cases. Pneumoirrigoscopy under fluoroscopic control (PIS) has been the standard conservative technique, but its radiation burden and single-attempt limitation prompted the development of ultrasound-guided hydroechocolonographic disinvagination (HEC). This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of HEC and PIS in paediatric intestinal intussusception.
Methods: A retrospective comparative study of 132 children aged 2 months to 10 years treated at the Specialized Paediatric Surgical Clinic of Samarkand State Medical University between 2000 and 2023. The control group (CG, n=59; January 2000–December 2013) received conventional PIS; the study group (SG, n=73; January 2014–December 2023) underwent ultrasound-guided HEC, a radiation-free technique developed at our institution. Primary outcomes were the rate of successful conservative reduction (assessed per patient), length of hospital stay, and mortality. Chi-squared and Student’s t-tests were used; p<0.05 was considered significant.
Results: The predominant age group was 6 months to 1 year (51.5%); males predominated (70.5%, p<0.001). The ileocaecal variant was found in 90.1% of patients. Successful conservative reduction was achieved in 53.4% (39/73) of the study group versus 39.0% (23/59) in the control group. Mean hospital stay was significantly shorter in the study group (2.5±0.66 vs 4.6±0.51 days, p<0.05). Group-specific mortality was 2.7% (2/73) in the SG versus 8.5% (5/59) in the CG.
Conclusion: Ultrasound-guided HEC is a safe, effective, and radiation-free alternative to PIS, achieving a higher rate of conservative reduction, a significantly shorter hospital stay, and enabling multiple reduction attempts. Disease duration alone should not determine treatment modality; clinical condition and the absence of peritoneal signs must be considered jointly.

KEYWORDS

Intussusception Ultrasonography Fluoroscopy Therapeutics Paediatric Surgery

CITATION (Vancouver)

Shamsiev J, Ksia A, Shamsiev A, Karavdic K, El Fiky M. Ultrasound-Guided Versus Fluoroscopic Conservative Reduction of Intestinal Intussusception in Children: A Retrospective Comparative Study. International Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine. 2026;1(1):jebm001. https://doi.org/10.63946/jebm/18437
APA
Shamsiev, J., Ksia, A., Shamsiev, A., Karavdic, K., & El Fiky, M. (2026). Ultrasound-Guided Versus Fluoroscopic Conservative Reduction of Intestinal Intussusception in Children: A Retrospective Comparative Study. International Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 1(1), jebm001. https://doi.org/10.63946/jebm/18437
Harvard
Shamsiev, J., Ksia, A., Shamsiev, A., Karavdic, K., and El Fiky, M. (2026). Ultrasound-Guided Versus Fluoroscopic Conservative Reduction of Intestinal Intussusception in Children: A Retrospective Comparative Study. International Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 1(1), jebm001. https://doi.org/10.63946/jebm/18437
AMA
Shamsiev J, Ksia A, Shamsiev A, Karavdic K, El Fiky M. Ultrasound-Guided Versus Fluoroscopic Conservative Reduction of Intestinal Intussusception in Children: A Retrospective Comparative Study. International Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine. 2026;1(1), jebm001. https://doi.org/10.63946/jebm/18437
Chicago
Shamsiev, Jamshid, Amine Ksia, Azamat Shamsiev, Kenan Karavdic, and Mahmoud El Fiky. "Ultrasound-Guided Versus Fluoroscopic Conservative Reduction of Intestinal Intussusception in Children: A Retrospective Comparative Study". International Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine 2026 1 no. 1 (2026): jebm001. https://doi.org/10.63946/jebm/18437
MLA
Shamsiev, Jamshid et al. "Ultrasound-Guided Versus Fluoroscopic Conservative Reduction of Intestinal Intussusception in Children: A Retrospective Comparative Study". International Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, vol. 1, no. 1, 2026, jebm001. https://doi.org/10.63946/jebm/18437

REFERENCES

  1. Hryhorczuk AL, Strouse PJ. Validation of US as a first-line diagnostic test for assessment of pediatric ileocolic intussusception. Pediatr Radiol. 2009;39(10):1075–1079. doi:10.1007/s00247-009-1353-z
  2. Ko HS, Schenk JP, Tröger J, Rohrschneider WK. Current radiological management of intussusception in children. Eur Radiol. 2007;17(9):2411–2421. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6496559
  3. Mandeville K, Chien M, Willyerd FA, Mandell G, Hostetler MA, Bulloch B. Intussusception: clinical presentations and imaging characteristics. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2012;28(9):842–844. doi:10.1097/PEC.0b013e318267a75e
  4. Buettcher M, Baer G, Bonhoeffer J, Schaad UB, Heininger U. Three-year surveillance of intussusception in children in Switzerland. Pediatrics. 2007;120(3):473–480. doi:10.1542/peds.2007-0035
  5. Waseem M, Rosenberg HK. Intussusception. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2008;24(11):793–800. doi:10.1097/PEC.0b013e31818c2a3e
  6. Daneman A, Navarro O. Intussusception. Part 2: An update on the evolution of management. Pediatr Radiol. 2004;34(2):97–108. doi:10.1007/s00247-003-1082-7
  7. Carroll AG, Kavanagh RG, Ni Leidhin C, Cullinan NM, Lavelle LP, Malone DE. Comparative effectiveness of imaging modalities for the diagnosis and treatment of intussusception: A critically appraised topic. Acad Radiol. 2017;24(5):521–529. doi:10.1016/j.acra.2017.01.002
  8. Applegate KE. Intussusception in children: evidence-based diagnosis and treatment. Pediatr Radiol. 2009;39(Suppl 2):S140–S143. doi:10.1007/s00247-009-1178-9
  9. Podkamenev VV. Intestinal intussusception in children [in Russian]. Irkutsk; 2018. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391129697
  10. Gu L, Zhu H, Wang S, Han Y, Wu X, Miao H. Sonographic guidance of air enema for intussusception reduction in children. Pediatr Radiol. 2000;30(5):339–342. doi:10.1007/s002470050754
  11. Khorana J, Singhavejsakul J, Ukarapol N, Laohapensang M, Wakhanrittee J, Patumanond J. Enema reduction of intussusception: the success rate of hydrostatic versus pneumatic reduction. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2015;11:1837–1842. doi:10.2147/TCRM.S92169
  12. Samad L, Marven S, El Bashir H, et al. Prospective surveillance study of the management of intussusception in UK and Irish infants. Br J Surg. 2012;99(3):411–415. doi:10.1002/bjs.7821
  13. Ntoulia A, Tharakan SJ, Reid JR, Pawel BR. Failed intussusception reduction in children: correlation between radiologic, surgical, and pathologic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;207(2):424–433. doi:10.2214/AJR.15.15659

LICENSE

Creative Commons License
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.