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

Lan Liu, Ling Zhang, Yifan Fang, Yingying Yang, Wen You, Jianxi Bai, Bing Zhang, Siqi Xie and Yuanyuan Fang

PLOS ONE, 2024, vol. 19, issue 3, 1-16

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

Date: 2024
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0297985 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 97985&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0297985

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0297985

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().