ArticlePediatric surgery international2014
Extraction of esophageal foreign bodies in children: rigid versus flexible endoscopy.
Article in Pediatric surgery international, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.
- Flexible versus rigid endoscopy in the management of esophageal foreign body impaction: systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of emergency surgery : WJES · 2018Pooled it
- Endoscopic techniques and factors for complications in pediatric esophageal foreign body removal.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2025Article
- Foreign Bodies in Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology: A Review.Pediatric reports · 2024Review
- A novel approach to button battery removal in a two-and-half year-old patient's esophagus after ingestion: a case report.BMC pediatrics · 2022Article
- Review of rigid esophagoscopy in a Tertiary Hospital in Ghana.The Pan African medical journal · 2021Article
- Extraction of Fish Bones Embedded in the EsophagusFrontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- 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
- Foreign object ingestion and esophageal food impaction: An update and review on endoscopic management.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2019Review
- Western view of the management of gastroesophageal foreign bodies.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2016Review
- Endoscopic Removal of 15 Gastrointestinal Foreign Bodies.APSP journal of case reportsArticle
- Multiple Atypical Esophageal Foreign Bodies in an Infant.Journal of Indian Association of Pediatric SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeForeign body (FB) ingestion is a common and potentially serious problem in children. Both rigid (RE) and flexible (FE) endoscopic techniques are used for removal of esophageal FBs; however, there is no consensus amongst pediatric surgeons regarding the best method. This study reviewed our experience managing esophageal FBs using both techniques.
methodsA 12-year retrospective review of children admitted with an esophageal FB between 1999 and 2012 was undertaken. Clinical data, management techniques, and complications were abstracted. Differences between these two groups were compared with standard statistical methods.
results657 children were treated for esophageal FB ingestion, of which 366 (56%) were treated with FE. The most frequently ingested item was a coin (84%), and FBs were most commonly lodged in the upper third of the esophagus (78%). There was a slightly younger population in the FE group (4.0 vs. 3.3 years, p < 0.01), but otherwise no significant differences were found between the groups. The FB was successfully removed with the initially chosen technique in 97% of patients.
conclusionsEsophageal FBs may be successfully removed with either RE or FE. Since treatment failures were managed with conversion to the other technique, both procedures should be included in the training curriculum.
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.