Js. Meyer et al., AIR AND LIQUID CONTRAST AGENTS IN THE MANAGEMENT OF INTUSSUSCEPTION -A CONTROLLED, RANDOMIZED TRIAL, Radiology, 188(2), 1993, pp. 507-511
A randomized study comparing air and liquid contrast agents for diagno
sis and reduction of intussusception involved 101 patients. Fifty rece
ived liquid contrast material and 51 received air. Rates of diagnosis
were 49% (25 of 51) for air and 54% (27 of 50) for liquid contrast mat
erial (P = .62). Rates of reduction were 76% (19 of 25) for air and 63
% (17 of 27) for liquid contrast material (P = .31). Air enemas result
ed in shorter fluoroscopic times in patients without an intussusceptio
n and for examinations by radiologists who had performed four or more
air enemas. Air enemas were found to be accurate in demonstration of i
ntussusception and at least as effective as liquid contrast medium for
reduction of intussusception. In experienced hands, the shorter fluor
oscopic time with resultant lower radiation exposure associated with a
ir is an important benefit. There still may be clinical situations, ho
wever, in which a liquid contrast agent is preferred.