You are here

Home » Content

Kolonoskopi ile İnvajinasyonun Pnömotik Redüksiyonu

Colonoscopy-Assisted Pneumatic Reduction of Intussusception

Journal Name:

  • Selçuk Tıp Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2010

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The aim of this study was to evaluate colonoscopyassisted pneumatic reduction(CAPR) of experimental colocolic intussusception(CCI). Twenty eight rabbits were divided into 2 groups each containing 14 rabbits: Group A and B. The animals were not fed orally 1 day before the experimental study and fed parenterally. After median line skin incision, abdominal wall was opened. Colocolic intussusception was performed. 100 ml/kg liquid electrolyte solution was given to all rabbits in postoperative period. Group A was observed for 2 days and Group B for 3 days. In Group A, the “currant jelly” stools were observed. Mean weights were 3.970±2.137 kg, reduction duration 3.97±2.47 minutes, air pressure 44.0±2.6 mmHg, and the success rate of reduction 100%. Perforation was not observed in this group. In Group B, the “currant jelly” stools were observed in 5 of 14 rabbits. Mean weights were 4.111±2.754 kg, reduction duration 4.01±1.71 minutes, air pressure 55.9±13.3 mmHg, and the success rate of reduction 93%. Perforation was observed in 1 rabbit in this group. The air pressure in group B was significantly higher than group A (p<0.05). In group A, hyperemia was observed in intussuscepted bowel segments of all rabbits and ischemic areas in 5 rabbits. In group B, the hyperemia was observed in intussuscepted bowel segments of all rabbits and ischemic areas in 8 rabbits. It was identified that there was no radiaton risk, bowel perforation, and morbidity in CAPR. Also, CAPR can be applied easily and tunica mucosa of bowel can be showed by CAPR in better way.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışmada deneysel kolokolik invajinasyonun kolonoskopi ile pnömotik redüksiyon (PR) unun değerlendirilmesi amaçlandı. Tavşanlar 14’erli 2 gruba ayrıldı. Deneklerin deneyden 1 gün önce gıda alımları durduruldu, parenteral olarak beslendi. Orta hat cilt kesisi sonrası karın duvarı açılarak kolokolik invajinasyon oluşturuldu. Tüm tavşanlara postoperatif 100 ml/kg/gün elektrolit solüsyonu verildi. Grup A 2, grup B 3 gün gözlendi. Kolonoskopi eşliğinde PR gerçekleştirildi. Grup A’da 14 tavşanın 3’ünde çilek jölesi tarzında gaita çıkışı gözlendi. Ortalama ağırlıkları 3.970±2.137 kg, redüksiyon süresi 3.97±2.47 dakika, hava basıncı 44.0±2.6 mmHg ve redüksiyonun başarı oranı %100’dü. Bu grupta perforasyon gözlenmedi. Grup B’de 14 tavşanın 5’inde çilek jölesi tarzında gaita çıkışı gözlendi. Ortalama ağırlıkları 4.1±2.75 kg, redüksiyon süresi 4.01±1.71 dakika, hava basıncı 55.9±13.3 mmHg ve redüksiyonun başarı oranı % 93’tü. Bu grupta 1 tavşanda perforasyon gözlendi. Grup B’de verilen hava basıncının grup A’ya göre istatistiksel olarak anlamlı derecede yüksek olduğu gözlendi (p<0.05). Grup A’da tüm tavşanların invajine barsak segmentinde hiperemi ve 5 tavşanda iskemik alanlar gözlendi. Grup B’de tüm tavşanların invajine barsak segmentinde hiperemi ve 8 tavşanda iskemik alanlar gözlendi. Kolonoskopi ile PR’un başarı oranı yüksek, barsak mukozasını daha iyi gösteren, perforasyon ve morbidite oranını düşüren, kolay yapılabilen ve radyasyon riski olmayan güvenli bir yöntem olduğu gözlendi.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-kolonoskopi-ile-invajinasyonun-pnomotik-reduksiyonu.pdf
  • 1
1-4
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1- Davis CF, McCabe AJ, Raine PAM. The Ins and Outs of Intussusception:
History and Management Over the Past Fifty Years. J Pediatr Surg 2003;38:
60-64.
2- Guo JZ, Ma XY, Zhou OH. Results of air pressure enema reduction of
intussusception: 6396 cases in 13 years. J Pediatr Surg 1986;21:1201-03.
3- Katz ME, Kolm P. Intussusception reduction: An international survey of
pediatric radiologists. Pediatr Radiol 1992;22:318-22.
4- Ayman AJ, Salam Y, Denis F, Marianne B, Erman M, Bütter A. Utility
of hospital admission after successful enema reduction ileocolik
intussusception. J Pediatr Surg 2006;41:1010-13.
5- Mahayosnond A, Sethsakul E, Trinavarat P, Chomdej S, Roekwibunsi S.
Treatment of Pediatric Intussusception by Pneumatic Reduction under USG
guidance. Chula Med J 2004;48: 299-07.
6- Rosenfeld K, McHugh K. Survey of intussusception reduction in England,
Scotland and Wales: How and why we could do beter. Clin Radiol 1999;54:
452-58.
7- Thomas RD, Fairhurst JJ, Roberts PJ. Effective Dose during screening
monitored intussusception reduction. Clin Radiol 1993;48:189-91.
8- Stig S, Jacob CL. Factors determining the need for operative reduction in
children with intussusception: a population-based study. J Pediatr Surg
2006;41:1014-19.
9- Stein M, Alton DJ, Daneman A. Pneumatic Reduction of Intussusception: 5
year experience. Radiology 1992;183:681.
10- Dermott VG, Taylor T, Mackenzie S, Hendry GMA. Pneumatic reduction
of intussusception: Clinical experience and factors affecting outcome. Clin
Radiol 1994;49:30-34.
11- Gorenstein A, Raucher A, Serour F, Witzling M, Katz R. Intussuception
in Children: Reduction with Repeated, Delayed Air Enema. Pediatric
Radiology 1998;206:721-24.
12- Miller SF, Landes AB, Dautenhahn LW, et al. Intussusception: Ability of
fluoroscopic images obtained during air enemas to depict lead points and
other abnormalities. Radiology 1995;197:493-96.
13- Ein SH. Leading points in childhood intussusception. J Pediatr Surg
1976;11:209-11.
14- Abasıyanık A, Daşcı Z, Yosunkaya A, et al. Laparaskopic-Assisted
Pneumatic Reduction of Intussusception. J Pediatr Surg 1997;32:1147-48.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com