ArticleSurgical endoscopy2013
Esophageal foreign bodies and eosinophilic esophagitis--the need for esophageal mucosal biopsy: a 12-year survey across pediatric subspecialties.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Esophageal Food Impaction and Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Retrospective Study, Systematic Review, and Meta-Analysis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2015Pooled it
- Increase in foreign body and harmful substance ingestion and associated complications in children: a retrospective study of 1199 cases from 2005 to 2017.BMC pediatrics · 2020Article
- Extraction of esophageal foreign bodies in children: rigid versus flexible endoscopy.Pediatric surgery international · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEsophageal foreign body impaction (EFBI) is a common problem requiring urgent endoscopy. EFBI may be the first sign of underlying esophageal pathology, yet mucosal biopsies are rarely performed.
methodsWe report a retrospective analysis of 572 children requiring removal of an EFBI over a 12-year period by pediatric otolaryngologists (ENT), surgeons (PS), and gastroenterologists (PGI). The method of removal [direct laryngoscopy (DL), rigid endoscopy (RE), flexible endoscopy (FE)], type of foreign body (inanimate or food), whether mucosal biopsies were performed, and histologic findings of biopsy samples were recorded for each patient.
resultsForeign body removal was most commonly performed by PGI (298 [52 %]); the remaining were equally distributed between ENT (136 [24 %]) and PS (138 [24 %]). The method of foreign body removal used by ENT was RE (89 %), DL (8 %), and FE (3 %). Pediatric surgery preferred FE (62 %), followed by RE (27 %) and DL (11 %). Pediatric gastroenterology used FE exclusively. Esophageal biopsies were never performed by ENT or PS; PGI performed esophageal biopsies more commonly in children with meat bolus impactions (50 %) than in children with inanimate foreign bodies (12 %). Mucosal pathology was more common in children with meat bolus impaction (100 %) than in children with inanimate foreign bodies (45 %).
conclusionsEsophageal mucosal biopsy should be considered for all children with EFBI not attributed to stricture, particularly those with meat bolus impaction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.