Intussusception hydrostatic reduction

Riccabona M (2002a) Potential of modern techniques in paediatric uroradiology. Eur J Radiol 43 110-121 Riccabona M, Simbrunner J, Ring E et al (2002b) Feasibility of MR-urography in neonates and infants with anomalies of the upper urinary tract. Eur J Radiol 12 1442-1450 Riebel TW, Nasir R, Weber K (1993) US-guided hydrostatic reduction of intussusception in children. Radiology 188 513-516... 

Rioux M (1992) Sonographic detection of the normal and abnormal appendix. AJR Am J Roentgenol 158 773-778 Rohrschneider WK, TrOger J (1995) Hydrostatic reduction of intussusception under US guidance. Pediatr Radiol... 

Keyzer C, Tack D, de Maertelaer V et al (2004) Acute appendicitis comparison of low-dose and standard-dose unenhanced multi-detector row CT. Radiology 232 164-172 Khong PL, Peh WC, Lam CH et al (2000) Ultrasound-guided hydrostatic reduction of childhood intussusception technique and demonstration. Radiographics 20 E1 (Erratum in Radiographics 2000 20 1818)... 

Woo SK, Kim JS, Suh SJ, Paik TW, Choi SO (1992) Childhood intussusception US-guided hydrostatic reduction. Radiology 182 77-80... 

Europe. The procedure is usually performed with saline solution (Fig. 1.55). Studies have shown a high reduction rate (76%-95%) with few complications, results similar to those of other hydrostatic methods (Wang and Liu 1988 Woo et al. 1992 Riebel et al. 1993 Rohrschneider and TrSger 1995). The principal advantage of this technique is the lack of radiation exposure. As a result, there is no limit to the procedure time, a fact that may improve the success rate. US has a high accuracy and reliability for monitoring the reduction process and for the visualization of all components of the intussusception. 

---