ArticleJornal de pediatria
Role of fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) in children with suspected dysphagia.
Article in Jornal de pediatria. 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.
- Swallowing disorders in cerebral palsy: a systematic review of oropharyngeal Dysphagia, nutritional impact, and health risks.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2025Pooled it
- Approach to Patients with Dysphagia: Clinical Insights.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Instrumental swallowing studies for the prevention of pulmonary morbidity in children and the importance of multi-disciplinary teams.Jornal de pediatriaArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess FEES findings in defining oral feeding safety in children with suspected dysphagia, comparing them with clinical feeding evaluation results.
methodsThis study comprised a case series involving children with suspected dysphagia, referred for evaluation by otolaryngologists and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) at a Brazilian quaternary public university hospital. These children underwent both clinical evaluations and fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES), with a comprehensive collection of demographic and clinical data. Subsequently, the authors performed a comparative analysis of findings from both assessments.
resultsMost patients successfully completed the FEES procedure (93.7%), resulting in a final number of 60 cases included in the study. The prevalence of dysphagia was confirmed in a significant 88% of these cases. Suspected aspiration on clinical SLP evaluation was present in 34 patients. Of these, FEES confirmed aspiration or penetration in 28 patients. Among the 35 patients with aspiration or penetration on FEES, 7 (20%) had no suspicion on SLP clinical assessment. All seven patients in whom clinical SLP evaluation failed to predict penetration/aspiration had neurological disorders. The median age of the children was 2.8 years, and 49 (81.6%) had neurological disorders, while 35 (58.3%) had chronic pulmonary disease. The most prevalent complaints were choking (41.6%) and sialorrhea (23.3%).
conclusionFEES can diagnose structural anomalies of the upper aerodigestive tract and significantly contribute to the detection of aspiration and penetration in this group of patients with suspected dysphagia, identifying moderate and severe dysphagia even in cases where clinical assessment had no suspicion.
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.