ArticlePrzeglad gastroenterologiczny2020
Endoscopic management of foreign body ingestion in children.
Article in Przeglad gastroenterologiczny, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unusual foreign body in the digestive tract: Endoscopic removal of a toothbrush in a pediatric patient.Radiology case reports · 2026Article
- Laparoscopic Management of Jejunal Perforation Caused by Toothpick Ingestion: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- Flexible Endoscopic Management of Foreign Body Ingestion in Children: A Ten-Year Single-Center Retrospective Study in the Philippines.Acta medica Philippina · 2026Article
- Extraction of a metallic susceptor after accidental ingestion of the heated tobaccostick TEREA™: a case report.BMC pediatrics · 2023Article
- Case Report: Modified endoscopic hook for extracting magnetic esophageal foreign bodies in a rural area.F1000Research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionForeign body ingestion is common in children. Most accidental ingestions are passed spontaneously without intervention. Some cases of ingestion require intervention in a timely fashion to reduce risks and morbidities.
aimTo analyse the clinical presentation, aetiology, and outcome of children presenting with foreign body ingestion, who required endoscopic intervention at a tertiary hospital (King Abdullah University Hospital, Irbid, Jordan). MATERIAL AND
methodsRecords of all patients with ingested foreign bodies requiring endoscopic retrieval over a 3-year period were reviewed retrospectively. Data on age, sex, type of ingested foreign body, presentation, type of intervention, stuck and retrieval location, outcome, and complications were collected.
resultsOf the sixty-three patients identified, 32 (50.8%) were male. Mean patient age was 7.7 ±3.4 years (range: 1 month-17.4 years). Most patients (74.6%) presented asymptomatically after the family or the child reported ingestion. Coins were the most commonly retrieved foreign bodies (37, 58.7%). The oesophagus was the most common site of retrieval (45, 71%). A rat tooth forceps was most commonly used to retrieve coins, followed by a net basket. Endoscopy was effective in managing the foreign body in 57 (90.5%) cases. Surgery was needed in 1 (1.6%) patient, a 1-month-old infant with a plastic tube in his stomach. All patients tolerated the procedure well with no complications. Interestingly, 7 (11.1%) male patients showed endoscopic features of eosinophilic oesophagitis; eosinophilic oesophagitis was confirmed histopathologically in three of them.
conclusionsEndoscopic intervention is effective and well tolerated in the management of ingested foreign bodies in the upper gastrointestinal system. Parents and children should be cautioned against playing with coins, to reduce the incidence of foreign body ingestion.
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.