Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39925487›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Probing the Matter: A Case of Rectal Foreign Body Insertion in a Patient With Intellectual Disability.

Shalmali Dharmadhikari, Akshay Rathod, Girish Bakhshi

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

3 authors.

Shalmali DharmadhikariDepartment of General Surgery, Grant Medical College and Sir JJ group of Hospitals, Mumbai, IND.
Akshay RathodDepartment of General Surgery, Grant Medical College and Sir JJ Group of Hospitals, Mumbai, IND.
Girish BakhshiDepartment of General Surgery, Grant Medical College and Sir JJ Group of Hospitals, Mumbai, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rectal foreign body insertion presents a challenging clinical scenario, with increasing incidence, particularly among males. In both acute management and long-term care, particularly when associated with psychiatric illness or intellectual disability, careful consideration is required. We report a 23-year-old male with mild intellectual disability who presented with a retained handheld bidet shower inserted for sexual gratification. He had a similar episode within the past six months. Despite the object being partially visible externally - that may cause the inexperienced, unassuming physician to falsely believe the ease of removal - it is imperative to follow proper diagnostic and management protocols for safe retrieval. Initial evaluation included radiographic assessment by X-ray imaging to determine the object's position and rule out complications. Successful transanal extraction was achieved without complications under general anesthesia. Postoperative CT with rectal contrast confirmed the absence of perforation or lingering damage related to the foreign body or procedure. The patient was subsequently referred for psychiatric evaluation and started on olanzapine but was later lost to follow-up. This case highlights the importance of systematic management protocols in rectal foreign body extraction, regardless of the apparent simplicity of retrieval. It also emphasizes the need for comprehensive psychiatric evaluation and follow-up care, particularly in patients with intellectual disability, while addressing the persistent social stigma surrounding both rectal foreign body insertion and mental health issues.

Indexed as

dangerous sexual practicesintellectual disabilitymental health awarenessrectal foreign body insertionsexual gratification

Identifiers

PMID39925487
PMCPMC11804833

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.