ArticleVeterinary sciences2023
Endoscopic Retrieval of Esophageal and Gastric Foreign Bodies in Cats and Dogs: A Retrospective Study of 92 Cases.
Article in Veterinary sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gastrointestinal Phytobezoars in Small Animals: A Retrospective Study of 18 Cases.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Comparative outcomes following laparotomy-assisted endoscopic removal or gastrotomy for treatment of linear foreign bodies in dogs and cats.Canadian journal of veterinary research = Revue canadienne de recherche veterinaire · 2025Article
- Prevalence and characteristics of foreign body-induced upper gastrointestinal obstruction in dogs.Journal of advanced veterinary and animal research · 2025Article
- Inadvertent removal of a needle foreign bodyThe Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Esophageal and gastric foreign bodies (FBs) commonly occur in small animal practices, and their endoscopic removal has been previously reported. However, few studies reported the endoscopic instruments used for the retrieval attempt and the time spent for endoscopic removal. Therefore, the aim of this study is to evaluate the factors that can influence the success rate and timing of the endoscopic retrieval of FBs. The medical records of 92 animals undergoing endoscopic removal of esophageal (n = 12) and gastric (n = 84) FBs have been reviewed. Two dogs had FBs in both the esophagus and stomach. From medical records and video recordings, there were extrapolated data on signalment, clinical signs, endoscopic devices used, success of retrieval, and duration of endoscopy. Endoscopic removal of FBs was successful in 88% cases, and the mean time spent for the extraction was 59.74 min (range, 10-120 min). The success rate and timing for the removal of endoscopic foreign bodies (EFBs) are influenced by several factors in our population: medium-breed dogs, adult animals, and localization of FBs in the body of the stomach increased the probability of failure during the endoscopic retrieval attempt. Conversely, the success and timing of the retrieval of EFBs were higher in puppies and with increasing operator's experience. Moreover, the use of combination devices such as polypectomy snare and grasping forceps negatively influenced the success of extraction of FBs. Further prospective and comparative studies in a large and multicentric population of patients can be useful to create interventional endoscopic guidelines, as in human medicine.
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.