Esophageal Button Battery Retrieval: Time-In May Not Be Everything.

Sriya Bhumi, Sheena Mago, Marianna G Mavilia-Scranton, John W Birk, Houman Rezaizadeh

Abstract readCase Reports

In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Sriya BhumiGastroenterology and Hepatology, New York Presbyterian, Queens, USA.

Sheena MagoGastroenterology and Hepatology, Allegheny Health Network, Pittsburgh, USA.

Marianna G Mavilia-ScrantonGastroenterology-Hepatology, Connecticut GI, Farmington, USA.

John W BirkGastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Connecticut Health, Farmington, USA.

Houman RezaizadehGastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Connecticut Health, Farmington, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The management of ingested foreign bodies is a challenging task because each case is unique with multiple varying factors including a patient's age, anatomical considerations, clinical presentation, and the type and location of the foreign body ingested. Additionally, concern over complications associated with button battery ingestion typically drives management decisions. The common practice is the urgent retrieval of the foreign body within two to six hours of presentation. An unusual case is presented here that demonstrated significantly delayed endoscopic removal of an ingested button battery without complication, avoiding the many risks associated with any emergent endoscopic procedure. However, this practice is a case-by-case decision because there is a lack of literature to guide the current management.

Indexed as

button battery ingestiondeliberate foreign body ingestionegdesophagogastroduodenoscopy (egd)foreign body retrievaltiming of endoscopy

Identifiers

PMID38752048

DOI10.7759/cureus.58327

PMCPMC11094668

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

LicenceCC BY

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.