临床研究

小儿急诊肠套叠空气灌肠复位失败的预测模型构建及验证

  • 李栋学 ,
  • 李德欢 ,
  • 孙弈鸣 ,
  • 胡光忠 ,
  • 黄清 ,
  • 刘家骥 ,
  • 江林
展开
  • 1.遵义医科大学第三附属医院、遵义市第一人民医院,放射科,(贵州 遵义 563000 )
    2.遵义医科大学第三附属医院、遵义市第一人民医院,泌尿外科,(贵州 遵义 563000 )

收稿日期: 2023-04-19

  网络出版日期: 2023-10-10

基金资助

国家自然科学基金项目(82160328);遵义市科技计划项目(遵市科合HZ字(2021)267号)

To construct and validate a predictive model for failed air enema reduction in children with emergency intussusceptions

  • Dongxue LI ,
  • Dehuan LI ,
  • Yiming SUN ,
  • Guangzhong HU ,
  • Qing HUANG ,
  • Jiaji LIU ,
  • Lin. JIANG
Expand
  • 1.Department of Radiology,the Third Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University,the First People′s Hospital of Zunyi,Zunyi 563000,China

Received date: 2023-04-19

  Online published: 2023-10-10

摘要

目的 构建小儿肠套叠X线透视下整复失败的预测模型。 方法 回顾性纳入肠套叠患儿439例,空气灌肠整复成功362例,失败77例,将总样本按照7∶3比例随机拆分为训练集308例和验证集131例。收集患儿空气灌肠参数和临床信息,使用单因素logistic回归筛选变量,然后采用多因素logistic回归分析构建预测模型并绘制诺莫图,评价模型区分度、校准度及决策曲线。 结果 空气灌肠成功与失败组的除性别、肠梗阻外,其余变量组间均差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。多因素logistic回归分析筛选的独立危险因素为年龄、病程、肠梗阻、套头位置及空灌压力五个变量用于建模。模型预测灌肠整复失败的区分度良好,AUC = 0.854(95%CI: 0.799 ~ 0.909),截断值为0.24,敏感度、特异度分别为79%、80%;校准曲线显示模型预测风险与实际情况高度吻合,Hosmer?Lemeshow检验χ2 = 8.159,P = 0.518;决策曲线显示模型具有临床适用性。 结论 空气灌肠压力值结合临床信息对灌肠复位失败风险具有较好预测能力,可为急诊肠套叠患儿临床决策提供一些参考。

本文引用格式

李栋学 , 李德欢 , 孙弈鸣 , 胡光忠 , 黄清 , 刘家骥 , 江林 . 小儿急诊肠套叠空气灌肠复位失败的预测模型构建及验证[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2023 , 39(18) : 2349 -2356 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-5725.2023.18.011

Abstract

Objective To establish a prediction model for failure of intussusception in children under fluoroscopy. Methods In this study, 439 children with intussusception were retrospectively included in our hospital, with 362 successful and 77 unsuccessful air enema. The total samples were randomly divided into 308 training sets and 131 verification sets according to a ratio of 7∶3. The parameters and clinical information of children with air enema were collected, the variables were screened by single factor Logistic regression analysis, and then the prediction model was constructed by multi?factor Logistic regression analysis and the Nomo diagram was drawn. The differentiation, calibration and decision curve of the model were evaluated. Results Statistical differences were found between the successful and unsuccessful groups except gender and intestinal obstruction (all P < 0.05). The independent risk factors screened by multivariate Logistic regression analysis were age, course of disease, intestinal obstruction, head position and empty irrigation pressure for modeling. The model had good differentiation in predicting the failure of recirculation, with AUC = 0.854 (95%CI: 0.799 ~ 0.909), truncation value of 0.24, sensitivity and specificity of 79% and 80%, respectively. The calibration curve showed that the risk predicted by the model was highly consistent with the actual situation. Hosmer Lemeshow test χ2 = 8.159, P = 0.518; The decision curve shows that the model has clinical applicability. Conclusion Air enema pressure combined with clinical information has a better ability to predict the risk of failure of enema reduction, which can provide some references for clinical decision?making in children with emergency intussusception.

参考文献

1 CHEN X, CHEN Q, WANG X, et al. Clinical characteristics of recurrent intussusception: A single-center retrospective study[J]. J Pediatr Surg, 2021, 56(10): 1831-1834.
2 KIM P H, HWANG J, YOON H M, et al. Predictors of failed enema reduction in children with intussusception: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Eur Radiol, 2021, 31(11): 8081-8097.
3 HWANG J, YOON H M, KIM P H, et al. Current diagnosis and image-guided reduction for intussusception in children[J]. Clin Exp Pediatr, 2023, 66(1): 12-21.
4 HU J, LIU M, YU X, et al. Clinical Characteristics of Intussusception with Surgical Reduction: a Single-Center Experience with 568 Cases[J]. J Gastrointest Surg, 2019, 23(11): 2255-2262.
5 RICHER E J, DICKSON P N. Colocolic intussusceptions in children: a pictorial essay and review of the literature[J]. Emerg Radiol, 2020, 27(1): 97-102.
6 KIM H W, JEON T Y, KIM K, et al. Fluoroscopic criteria for on-site evaluation of failed intussusception reduction during air enema technique[J]. Quant Imaging Med Surg, 2022, 12(7): 3738-3747.
7 NISAR M U, SIKANDER S, KHAN N A, et al. Determinants Of Bowel Resection In Childhood Intussusception[J]. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad, 2020, 32(1): 9-12.
8 LIM R Z M, LEE T, NG J Y Z, et al. Factors associated with ultrasound-guided water enema reduction for pediatric intussusception in resource-limited setting: potential predictive role of thrombocytosis and anemia[J]. J Pediatr Surg, 2018, 53(11): 2312-2317.
9 肖霞, 冯肖媛, 杨虎, 等. 武汉地区儿童急性肠套叠病例的临床流行病学特征[J]. 实用医学杂志, 2019, 35(5): 804-808.
10 杨绍伟, 陈瑜, 肖霞, 等. 影响因素预测小儿肠套叠空气灌肠整复失败的价值[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2022, 40(6): 738-747.
11 PATEL D M, LOEWEN J M, BRAITHWAITE K A, et al. Radiographic findings predictive of irreducibility and surgical resection in ileocolic intussusception[J]. Pediatr Radiol, 2020, 50(9): 1249-1254.
12 GONDEK A S, RIAZA L, CUADRAS D, et al. Ileocolic intussusception: Predicting the probability of success of ultrasound guided saline enema from clinical and sonographic data[J]. J Pediatr Surg, 2018, 53(4): 599-604.
13 XIE X, YANG W, QI W, et al. Risk factors for failure of hydrostatic reduction of intussusception in pediatric patients: A retrospective study[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2019, 98(1): e13826.
14 WILLIAMS J L, WOODWARD C, ROYALL I R, et al. Outcomes in pediatric patients with documented delays between ileocolic intussusception diagnosis and therapeutic enema attempt: evaluation of reduction efficacy and complication rate[J]. Emerg Radiol, 2022, 29(6): 953-959.
15 SHEN G, ZHANG C, LI J, et al. Risk factors for short-term recurrent intussusception and reduction failure after ultrasound-guided saline enema[J]. Pediatr Surg Int, 2018, 34(11): 1225-1231.
16 LIU S T, LI Y F, WU Q Y, et al. Is enema reduction in pediatric intussusception with a history of over 48 h safe: A retrospective cohort study[J]. Am J Emerg Med, 2023, 68: 33-37.
17 AJAO A E, LAWAL T A, OGUNDOYIN O O, et al. Clinical predictors and outcome of bowel resection in paediatric intussusception[J]. Afr Health Sci, 2020, 20(3): 1463-1470.
18 KHORANA J, SINGHAVEJSAKUL J, UKARAPOL N, et al. Prognostic indicators for failed nonsurgical reduction of intussusception[J]. Ther Clin Risk Manag, 2016, 12: 1231-1237.
19 GUO J Y, QIAN Y F. Predicting recurrent cases of intussusception in children after air enema reduction with machine learning models[J]. Pediatr Surg Int, 2022, 39(1): 9.
20 KS K, SL V, DW S. Outcome measures after robot~assisted radical prostatectomy[J]. Robotic Urology, 2018, 9(5): 117-136.
21 ZHANG Y, SHAO C C, WEI X L, et al. Ultrasound Findings to Predict Risk of Recurrence in Pediatric Intussusception After Air Enema Reduction[J]. J Ultrasound Med, 2022, 41(5): 1227-1235.
22 丁璐, 于瑞娜, 贺晓. 高频超声联合低频超声诊断小儿肠套叠的价值[J]. 中国实用医刊, 2023, 50(8): 69-72.
23 华浅近, 沈剑敏, 夏贤武,等. 儿童肠套叠行空气灌肠整复术规范化方案探讨[J]. 中国妇幼保健, 2023, 38(10): 1809-1812.
文章导航

/