ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
Esophageal foreign bodies: a retrospective analysis of 275 cases.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rectal Impaction of a Migratory Duck Bone After 72 Asymptomatic Hours: A Defused Time Bomb.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Esophageal Perforation and Fistulization After Ingestion of Multiple Foreign Bodies: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- Concealed Peritonitis Due to Stomach Perforation from a Fish Otolith: A Case Report.Reports (MDPI) · 2025Article
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
Background: Esophageal foreign bodies, especially complex foreign bodies, are a clinical emergency that require a specific management strategy. The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical features of adult patients with esophageal foreign bodies, examine different endoscopic management strategies for esophageal foreign bodies, summarize the experience of Department of Gastroenterology of Henan Provincial People's Hospital in the treatment of esophageal foreign bodies, and ultimately improve the success rate of foreign body removal. Methods: The medical records of 275 adult patients with esophageal foreign bodies successfully treated under endoscopy at the Department of Gastroenterology of Henan Provincial People's Hospital from January 2017 to August 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Results: Among the 275 patients, 210 patients had no underlying esophageal diseases, while 65 experienced esophageal stricture due to variety of reasons. In the 210 patients, sharp objects were the predominant foreign bodies in the esophagus. The most common location of esophageal foreign bodies was the upper segment, followed by the middle and lower segments. Among the 65 patients with esophageal strictures, the types of esophageal foreign bodies included large food bolus, vegetable pieces, meat chunks, and tablets. Foreign body forceps, snares, and biopsy forceps were the instruments most frequently used to manage these bodies. There were statistically significant differences in the impaction time between different age groups (P<0.05). Of the 275 patients, 20 had esophageal perforation, while the remaining patients showed various degrees of congestion, erosion, or ulceration during endoscopy. Conclusions: Older adult patients were more likely to experience prolonged impaction. Endoscopic removal of esophageal foreign bodies is safe and effective. An appropriate strategy based on the size, type, and location is needed in order to remove foreign bodies and ensure successful removal, reduce risk, and avoid surgical interventions, especially in cases of complex foreign bodies.
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.