ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2022
Foreign body ingestion: Is intervention always a necessity?
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recurrent Deliberate Foreign Body Ingestion: Psychiatric Comorbidities, Management Strategies, and Ethical Considerations.Current psychiatry reports · 2026Review
- Article
- Toothpick-induced superior mesenteric artery -duodenal fistula with thrombosis: a rare case report.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Asymptomatic spontaneous expulsion of a long foreign body through the gastrointestinal tract - a curious case report.Radiology case reports · 2024Article
- Accidental Sewing Pin Ingestion by a Tailor: A Case Report and Literature Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Intentional and accidental foreign body ingestion are commonly encountered in clinical practice. In adults, intentional foreign body ingestion is frequently observed among individuals with psychiatric disorders and prisoners. Controversies exist regarding the management of sharp or pointed objects. We contribute to this existing controversy by presenting a case of a 43-year-old male who accidently ingested a metallic screw and was managed successfully through endoscopic retrieval. Case presentation: We discuss a case of a 43-year-old male presented to our emergency department after accidently swallowing a metallic screw, 1 h and a half prior to his presentation. He was initially asymptomatic then started to complain of vague abdominal symptoms. X-rays of the chest and abdomen demonstrated the presence of a metallic screw at the mid-abdomen. Computed tomography scan of the abdomen then confirmed its presence within the gastric lumen, with no evidence of gastric or bowel perforation. The patient was managed via esophagogastroduodenoscopy in which the ingested screw was extracted. He was discharged after 24 hours in a good condition. Clinical discussion: A limited number of epidemiological studies have shed light on the prevalence and incidence of foreign body ingestion among adult individuals. Probability of spontaneous passage depends on several factors including the size, shape and composition of the impacted item, as well as the age of patient and duration of ingestion prior to presentation. Conclusion: Considering the variation of ingested objects and the availability of several therapeutic approaches, a patient-tailored management plan should always be established.
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.