Table 2. Comparison of Recurrence Rates of Intussusception After Successful Reduction.
| Authors | Country | Recurrence Rate, % | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BE | AE | Operative | ||
| Beasley et al. (28) | Australia | 18.4 | NA | 2.7 |
| Stringer and Ein (24) | Canada | 11 | 8 | NA |
| Palder et al. (19) | Canada | 10 | 4 | 0 |
| Fecteau et al. (11) | Canada | 12.5 | NA | 8.2 |
| Ein (23) | Canada | 11 | NA | 3 |
| Eshel et al. (17) | Israel | 10 | 5.9 | 0 |
| Alehossein and Babaheidarian (29) | Iran | 0 | 11 | 2.3 |
| Fragoso et al. (30) | Portugal | NA | 6.5 | 0 |
| Kaiser et al. (31) | India | 13 | NA | 1 |
| Gilmore et al. (32) | Canada | 12.5 | NA | NA |
| Niramis et al. (10) | Thailand | 15.8 | 11.4 | 3 |
| Ksia et al. (18) | Tunisia | 5.7 | NA | 4.6 |
| Our study | Iran | 25.4 | NA | 4.5 |