ArticleThe Laryngoscope2024
Resource Utilization and Risk Factors for Esophageal Injury in Pediatric Esophageal Foreign Bodies.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Direct-Vision Removal of an Impacted Esophageal Padlock in a 7-year-Old at a Resource-Limited Facility: A Case Report.International medical case reports journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWhile management protocols of pediatric esophageal foreign bodies (EFBs) are well-delineated, resource utilization can be improved. This study's objectives were to explore hospital charges/costs for pediatric patients who present with EFBs and to identify patient risk factors associated with esophageal injury.
methodsA retrospective chart review of patients undergoing aerodigestive foreign body removal at a tertiary-care children's hospital from 2018 to 2021 was conducted. Data collected included demographics, medical history, presenting symptoms, EFB type, surgical findings, and hospital visit charges/costs.
results203 patients were included. 178 of 203 (87.7%) patients were admitted prior to operation. Unwitnessed EFB ingestion (p < 0.001, OR = 15.1, 95% CI = 5.88-38.6), experiencing symptoms for longer than a week (p < 0.001, OR = 11.4, 95% CI = 3.66-38.6) and the following presenting symptoms increased the odds of esophageal injury: dysphagia (p = 0.04, OR = 2.45, 95% CI = 1.02-5.85), respiratory distress (p = 0.005, OR = 15.5, 95% CI = 2.09-181), coughing (p < 0.001, OR = 10.1, 95% CI = 3.73-28.2), decreased oral intake (p = 0.001, OR = 6.60, 95% CI = 2.49-17.7), fever (p = 0.001, OR = 5.52, 95% CI = 1.46-19.6), and congestion (p = 0.001, OR = 8.15, 95% CI = 2.42-27.3). None of the 51 asymptomatic patients had esophageal injury. The median total charges during the encounter was $20,808 (interquartile range: $18,636-$24,252), with operating room (OR) (median: $5,396; 28.2%) and inpatient admission (median: $5,520; 26.0%) contributing the greatest percentage.
conclusionsAsymptomatic patients with EFBs did not experience esophageal injury. The OR and inpatient observation accounted for the greatest percentage of the hospital charges. These results support developing a potential algorithm to triage asymptomatic patients to be managed on a same-day outpatient basis to improve the value of care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 134:4774-4782, 2024.
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.