What are the key ultrasound findings in an infant suspected of having congenital hypertrophic pyeloric stenosis (CHPS) on a whole abdomen ultrasound (USG)?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: January 28, 2026View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Ultrasound Findings in Congenital Hypertrophic Pyloric Stenosis

The definitive ultrasound diagnosis of hypertrophic pyloric stenosis requires pyloric muscle thickness >3-4 mm and pyloric channel length >15-17 mm, with ultrasound being the diagnostic modality of choice with 95-100% sensitivity and specificity. 1

Primary Diagnostic Criteria

Pyloric muscle wall thickness >3-4 mm is the main diagnostic criterion for hypertrophic pyloric stenosis on ultrasound. 1, 2 The American College of Radiology establishes this as the definitive measurement threshold, though the exact cutoff varies slightly by institution (3-4 mm). 1

Pyloric channel length >15-17 mm indicates abnormal elongation characteristic of HPS. 1, 2 Some sources define this as >12 mm, but the more conservative 15-17 mm threshold provides higher specificity. 2

Key Imaging Features

  • "Target sign" or "doughnut sign" on transverse view - the hypertrophied pyloric muscle appears as a thick hypoechoic ring surrounding the echogenic mucosa in the center. 1, 2

  • Failure of the pyloric canal to relax - real-time observation shows persistent narrowing without normal opening and closing during the examination. 2

  • Lack of gastric emptying - fluid remains in the stomach without passage through the pylorus during the study. 3

Critical Age-Related Considerations

In infants younger than 21 days, lower thresholds should be applied - muscle thickness >3.5 mm may be diagnostic rather than the standard 4 mm cutoff used in older infants. 4 This is crucial because mean measurements in proven HPS cases for infants ≤21 days were significantly lower (MT 3.7 mm vs 4.6 mm in older infants). 4

Important Pitfalls to Avoid

Pylorospasm can mimic HPS measurements during portions of the examination, with 53% of pylorospasm cases showing muscle wall thickness ≥4 mm and 18% showing pyloric length ≥18 mm at some point during scanning. 5 The key distinguishing feature is measurement variability - pylorospasm shows considerable fluctuation in measurements throughout the study, while true HPS maintains unchanged measurements. 5

If initial ultrasound is negative but clinical suspicion remains high, repeat ultrasound in 48 hours rather than dismissing the diagnosis, as HPS can evolve over days. 3

Role of Point-of-Care Ultrasound (POCUS)

The European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care acknowledges that POCUS may recognize HPS, though definitive diagnosis should be confirmed by a pediatric radiologist. 6 This reflects disagreement in the guidelines (quality of evidence D), suggesting that while POCUS can identify HPS, formal radiology confirmation is prudent before surgical intervention. 6

Ultrasound Technique Considerations

Systematic scanning of the antropyloric region should be performed with the infant in the right lateral decubitus or supine position, using a high-frequency linear transducer to optimize visualization of the pyloric muscle layers. 2 Real-time observation over several minutes is essential to distinguish true HPS from transient pylorospasm. 5

References

Guideline

Diagnostic Approach to Hypertrophic Pyloric Stenosis

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Research

Immediate Emergency Department Diagnosis of Pyloric Stenosis with Point-of-care Ultrasound.

Clinical practice and cases in emergency medicine, 2017

Research

Ultrasonography of pylorospasm: findings may simulate hypertrophic pyloric stenosis.

Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, 1998

Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.