IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0297985.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Air enema reduction versus hydrostatic enema reduction for intussusceptions in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Lan Liu
  • Ling Zhang
  • Yifan Fang
  • Yingying Yang
  • Wen You
  • Jianxi Bai
  • Bing Zhang
  • Siqi Xie
  • Yuanyuan Fang

Abstract

Objectives: We conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of fluoroscopy-guided air enema reduction (FGAR) and ultrasound-guided hydrostatic enema reduction (UGHR) for the treatment of intussusception in pediatric patients. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on retrospective studies obtained from various databases, including PUBMED, MEDLINE, Cochrane, Google Scholar, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), WanFang, and VIP Database. The search included publications from January 1, 2003, to March 31, 2023, with the last search done on Jan 15, 2023. Results: We included 49 randomized controlled studies and retrospective cohort studies involving a total of 9,391 patients, with 4,841 in the UGHR and 4,550 in the FGAR. Specifically, UGHR exhibited a significantly shorter time to reduction (WMD = -4.183, 95% CI = (-5.402, -2.964), P

Suggested Citation

  • Lan Liu & Ling Zhang & Yifan Fang & Yingying Yang & Wen You & Jianxi Bai & Bing Zhang & Siqi Xie & Yuanyuan Fang, 2024. "Air enema reduction versus hydrostatic enema reduction for intussusceptions in children: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(3), pages 1-16, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0297985
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0297985
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0297985
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0297985&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0297985?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0297985. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.