Daft Ary

8/10/2019 Daft Ary

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/daft-ary 1/50

Intussusception: A Guide to Diagnosis

and Intervention in Children

Genevieve Daftary,

Harvard Medical School,

Year III

Gillian Lieberman, MD

8/10/2019 Daft Ary


Genevieve Daftary, MS3

Gillian Lieberman, MDNovember 2005

2

The Anatomy of Intussusception

Intussusception occurs when

a segment of bowel, the

intussusceptum, telescopes

into a more distant segment

of bowel, the intussuscipiens

The most common type is

ileocolic (pictured here),

followed by ileoileocolic,ileoileas, and colocolic

Radiologic Clinics of North America 1997

www.yoursurgery/Intussusception.jpg

Intussuscipiens

8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Radiologic Clinics of North America 1997; Pediatrics 20003

Demographics

Most common acute abdominal disorder of earlychildhood (56 children/ 100,000/ year in US)

Boys 4x’s more frequently than girls

Majority of patients between 3 mon and 3 yr – Peak incidence between 5 and 9 months

– 75% under 2 years

Seasonal peaks in spring and autumn

95% no pathologic lead point

5-10% recognizable lead point

Some evidence of significant attributable risk with

rotavirus vaccine administration

8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Radiologic Clinics of North America 1996,19974

Etiologies of Intussusception

Idiopathic: no defined lead point – Association with viral illness (adenovirus)

– Hypertrophy of lymphoid tissue

Recognizable cause for lead point – Meckel’s diverticulum

– Intestinal polyp

– Enteric duplication

– Lymphoma – Intramural hematoma

– Ameboma

– Henoch-Schönlein purpura

8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Radiologic Clinics of North America 1996, 19975

Clinical Presentation: VARIABLE

Intermittent, colicky cramping, pain

Later development of lethargy and somnolence

Vomiting (may be bile-stained)

Current jelly stool (blood and mucus)

Sausage shaped mass

Distention and tenderness

Classic Triad: abdominal pain, currant jelly stool,

palpable abdominal mass (<50%)

8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Radiologic Clinics of North America 19976

Complications

Typically do not occur within the first 24 hrs…

Bowel obstruction

Intestinal ischemia

Perforation

Shock

Sepsis

Dehydration

…thus we have a window of opportunity in which

to treat and avoid surgery.

8/10/2019 Daft Ary




AJR 2005; Rad Clinics of N Amer 19967

Overview of Screening Tools

Abdominal Radiograph – Screen for other Dx’s and free air

– Can be safely omitted in the presence of US

– 45% sensitivity

Abdominal Sonography

– Diagnostic accuracy near 100%, eval of reducibility, +/- lead

point, post reduction, ischemia

Abdominal CT scan

– Accuracy approaching 100%; especially good for lead points

– High cost, risk of radiation, and risk of sedation in children

make it unpractical

8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Children's Hospital Boston8

Patient One: Presentation

6 year old female

3 weeks ago: URI w/ fever, vomiting, diarrhea

(greenish, non-bloody), abdominal pain;

seemed to resolve after 3 days

1 week ago: increasingly lethargic and irritable,

w/vomiting and fever

8/10/2019 Daft Ary





Patient One: Supine KUB

8/10/2019 Daft Ary





Patient One: Supine KUB

Paucity of Gason Right Side of

Abdomen

8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Radilogic Clinics of North America 1996; Amer J Rad 200511

Abdominal Radiograph

Signs of Intussusception – Soft tissue mass

– Target sign: created by mesenteric fat

– Absence of cecal gas and stool

– Meniscus sign: crescent of gas outlining intussusceptum – Loss of visualization of the tip of the liver

– Paucity of bowel gas

Poor sensitivity for dx of intussusception: 45%

May be useful to exclude other Dx

Determine presence of free air (contraindication to non-surgical reduction with contrast)

May be safely omitted if ultrasound is available

8/10/2019 Daft Ary




RadioGraphics 199912

Target & Meniscus Signs

i f

8/10/2019 Daft Ary





Target & Meniscus Signs

G i D f MS3 N b 2005

8/10/2019 Daft Ary





Patient One: Longitudinal Ultrasound

G i D ft MS3 N b 2005

8/10/2019 Daft Ary





Patient One: Longitudinal Ultrasound

•TelescopingBowel

•Sandwich Sign/

Pseudokidney

G i D ft MS3 N b 2005

8/10/2019 Daft Ary





Patient One: Axial Ultrasound

Gene ie e Daftar MS3 N b 2005

8/10/2019 Daft Ary





Patient One: Axial Ultrasound

Doughnut/

Target Sign

Genevieve Daftary MS3 November 2005

8/10/2019 Daft Ary





Patient One: Doppler Ultrasound


8/10/2019 Daft Ary





Patient One: Doppler Ultrasound

•Blood flow

maintained

•Rule out

ischemia ofinvolved bowel


8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Rad Clinics of N Amer 199720

Abdominal Ultrasound

Replaced abdominal radiograph as primaryscreening modality

Sensitivity 98 -100%; specificity 88 -100%

Appearance: outer hypoechoic regionsurrounding an echogenic center or multipleconcentric rings

Use Doppler to determine bowel ischemia;guides reduction decisions

Guide hydrostatic and pneumatic reduction


8/10/2019 Daft Ary





Ultrasound Cross-Sections

• A = intussuscipiens• B = everted intussusceptum

• C = central intussusceptum

• M = mesentery

• L = lymph nodes

• MS = contacting mucosal

surfaces

• S = contacting serosal

surfaces


8/10/2019 Daft Ary





Patient One: Air Enema

Normal bowel gas pattern: Spontaneous Reduction


8/10/2019 Daft Ary





Enemas

Air, Liquid (saline, soluble contrast), Barium

At one time used for Dx

– Coiled spring: edematous mucosal folds of returning

intussusceptum outlined by contrast in colon – Meniscus sign

Now used mainly for Treatment/Reduction

– Avoid patient discomfort and risk of perforation

– US better diagnostic tool & rule out tool

Genevieve Daftary, MS3 November 2005

8/10/2019 Daft Ary





Meniscus & Coiled Spring Signs

8/10/2019 Daft Ary



8/10/2019 Daft Ary


y,


Radiology 2001; AJR 2004 & 2005; RadioGraphics 199926

Reduction Procedures cont.

Pneumatic reduction with fluoroscopic guidance – Quick, safe, clean (less fecal spillage), cheap

– Radiation exposure, cannot depict lead points well, only see

intraluminal content

US-guided Pneumatic reduction

– No radiation, confirm dx, highest successful reduction rate

(92%), quick and clean, can see lead points well (but not all)

– Air blocks US beam; difficult to see ileocecal valve andresidual intussusceptions

Surgical


8/10/2019 Daft Ary


y,


Rad Clinics of N Amer 199627

Contraindications to Enema

Dehydration

Peritonitis

Shock

Sepsis

Free air on radiograph

Stabilize then treat surgically


8/10/2019 Daft Ary


y


AJR 200528

Complications of Reduction

Perforation – Overall rate of 0.8%

– Similar rates for liquid and air enemas

– Perforations with air usually smaller

Recurrence

– Approximately 10%

– Similar rates for liquid and air enemas

– 50% will occur within 48 hrs

– Repeat enemas are safe and effective


8/10/2019 Daft Ary



AJR 200529

Reduction Guidelines

Liquid Enema Rule of Three’s for Barium – 3 attempts

– 3 min duration

– Liquid enema bag 3 feet above fluoroscopy table (5feet if using water-soluble contrast)

Air Enema

– Ensure maximal pressures <120 mm Hg at rest


8/10/2019 Daft Ary



AJR 2002 & 200530

Success of Reduction Depend On…

Short duration of symptoms (<24-48 hrs)

Adequate hydration

Age (older than 3 months)

Absence of small-bowel obstruction

Absence of trapped intraperitoneal fluid

Absence of enlarged lymph nodes in theintussusceptum

Adequate blood flow

Location other than the rectum (rectum only 25%success)


8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Patient Two: Presentation

2 year old male

Worsening vomiting and abdominal pain since the

morning of admission

Vomited 8x’s since morning, no bile, blood or stool

No fevers; no current or recent illness

No new foods, travel or trauma

Prior incident of vomiting which he recovered from onemonth prior

Abdomen soft, non-distended with active BS, diffusely

tender


8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Patient Two: Supine KUB

Patient does not have

classic triad of

intussusception

Use KUB to

consider other

diagnoses


8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Patient Two: Supine KUB

•Paucity ofGas on Right

•Dilated

loops of

small bowel

•Looks likeobstruction


illi i bNovember 2005

8/10/2019 Daft Ary



Felson, Gamuts in Radiology34

DDx of Intestinal Obstruction in a Child

Adhesions/Congenital peritoneal bands (Ladd’sbands

Appendicitis

Hernia, incarcerated (internal or external)

Hirschsprung disease

Intussusception

Uncommonly: Crohn’s, fecal impaction, bezoar,Kawasaki , neoplasm, congenital stenosis, TB,volvulus, CF, Chronic granulomatous disease


Gilli Li b MDNovember 2005

8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Patient Two: Longitudinal Ultrasound

Use US to explore

possible causes of

obstruction including

intussusception

Patient is not exposed

to any further radiationor the discomfort of

enema until further Dx



8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Patient Two: Sagittal Ultrasound

Dilated loops of bowel



8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Patient Two: Axial Ultrasound


Gillian Lieberman MDNovember 2005

8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Patient Two: Axial Ultrasound

•Doughnut/Target

Sign

•Patient’s obstructionis due to

intussusception



8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Patient Two: Doppler Ultrasound



8/10/2019 Daft Ary




Patient Two: Doppler Ultrasound

•Blood flow

maintained

•Rule out bowelischemia

•Patient is safe to

receive an USguided air enema

with likelihood of

resolution



8/10/2019 Daft Ary



41

Review

Intussusception is COMMON in young children

Clinical presentation is variable underscoring the needfor a safe, quick, inexpensive screening tool such asultrasound

Ultrasound is extremely accurate in diagnosingobstruction; CT is more accurate in defining a leadpoint; abdominal radiographs can be helpful in

considering other diagnoses

Ultrasound guided air enema combines the safety ofultrasound (lack of radiation) with the effectiveness,ease, cleanliness, and safety of air enema in reducing

intussusception



8/10/2019 Daft Ary



42

What does intussusception look like on CT?

Since lead points are more likely in the adultpopulation, CT is done more frequently in this

population with suspected intussusception

Scroll through the following images to get asense of what intussusception looks like on CT

Notice the familiar target sign, also useful in

diagnosis using plain film and ultrasound!

8/10/2019 Daft Ary




8/10/2019 Daft Ary



BIDMC PACS44

Intussusception on CT



8/10/2019 Daft Ary



BIDMC PACS45




8/10/2019 Daft Ary



BIDMC PACS46




8/10/2019 Daft Ary


,

BIDMC PACS47




8/10/2019 Daft Ary


,

BIDMC PACS48




8/10/2019 Daft Ary


,

49

References

Applegate KE. Clinically Suspected Intussusception in Children: Evidence-Based

Review and Self-Assessment Module. AJR 2005; 185: S175-S183.

Daneman A and Alton J. Intussusception: Issues and Controversies Related toDiagnosis and Reduction. Radiologic Clinics of North America 1996; 34: 743-756.

Del-Pozo G et al. Intussusception in Children: Current Concepts in Diagnosis andEnema Reduction. RadioGraphics 1999; 19: 299-319.

Felson. Gamuts in Radiology.

Koumanicou C et al. Sonographic Detection of Lymph Nodes in theIntussusception of Infants and Young Children. AJR 2002; 178: 445-450.

Navarro O, Daneman A, Chae A. Intussusception: The Use of Delayed RepeatedReduction Attempts and the Management of Intussusceptions Due to Pathologic

Lead Points in Pediatric Patients. AJR 2004; 182: 1169-1176.

Parashar UD et al. Trends in Intussusception-Associated Hospitalizations anddeaths Among US Infants. Pediatrics 2000; 106: 1413-1421.

Sivit CJ. Gastrointestinal Emergencies in Older Infants and Children. RadiologicClinics of North America 1997; 35: 865-877.

Yoon CH, Kim HJ, Goo HW. Intussusception in Children: US-guided PneumaticReduction—Initial Experience. Radiology 2001; 218: 85-88.



8/10/2019 Daft Ary


Acknowledgements

Special Thanks To… – Melissa Gerlach, MD

– Anne-Catherine Kim, MD

– Larry Barbaras, Webmaster

– Pamela Lepkowski

– Gillian Lieberman, MD

Daft Ary

Documents