ArticlePloS one2024
Characteristics and treatment of pediatric nasal foreign bodies with button batteries-A retrospective analysis of 176 cases.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Behind the Unilateral Rhinorrhea: Delayed Pediatric Intranasal Foreign Bodies Presenting as Chronic Sinonasal Disease and Severe Complications.Pediatric reports · 2026Article
- A Killer in Disguise: Button Battery Ingestions in Acute Care.Current pharmaceutical design · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeButton battery nasal impactions pose serious risks due to complications and the need for prompt removal, yet research on interventions remains limited due to its rare occurrence. To delineate the clinical manifestations of nasal foreign bodies associated with button batteries and to explore treatment approaches focused on minimizing the reliance on general anesthesia and surgical interventions.
methodsThis study focuses on 176 cases of children who received treatment for nasal cavity button battery impactions. It encompasses various factors including age, gender, battery location, impaction duration, methods of extraction, and associated complications.
resultsThe incidence of nasal button battery cases among nasal foreign body instances was 1.16%, with a majority being males (60.23%) aged 1-5 years (98.29%). Utilizing a specially designed nasal foreign body hook and following established treatment protocols enabled the successful outpatient management of the majority of cases. Only 12 cases (6.82%) necessitated removal under general anesthesia due to management challenges in an outpatient setting. Furthermore, our findings indicated no linear correlation between the duration of battery retention and the risk of nasal septal perforation, which was observed in 31 cases (17.61%).
conclusionNasal foreign bodies caused by button batteries in children demand urgent attention due to their potentially grave outcomes. Our research is directed towards enhancing diagnostic and therapeutic strategies to bolster the success rates of outpatient removal, curtail the duration of foreign body retention, and diminish the reliance on general anesthesia.
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.