ArticleJournal of orthopaedic case reports2026
Retention or Retrieval: A dilemma in a Case of Pediatric Cervical Spine Penetrating Injury from an Air Gun Pellet.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Airgun or air-rifle injuries are often perceived as minor injuries; however, they can cause significant morbidity, particularly in children. The cervical spine, with its vital neurovascular and airway structures around, is vulnerable to any penetrating injury, even to low-velocity projectiles. Case Report: We report the case of a 9-year-old boy who sustained an accidental posterior cervical airgun injury at home. The child was neurologically intact, and imaging revealed a retained metallic pellet deeply embedded in the posterior aspect of the neck impacted within the edge of the right lateral mass of the C7 vertebra without involvement of the spinal canal or injury to major vessels. Multiple unsuccessful retrieval attempts were performed at the district hospital before the pellet was successfully removed surgically at our tertiary care institute. The post-operative course was uneventful, and the child remained asymptomatic on follow-up. Conclusion: Pediatric cervical airgun injuries, though often considered minor, can endanger vital cervical structures. Even in neurologically intact patients, retained projectiles may warrant surgical removal when safely accessible to prevent delayed complications such as infection or migration. This case underscores the principle of decision-making beyond deficits, where management is guided by anatomical risk, long-term safety, and the imperative to raise public awareness about the potential dangers of airguns in children.
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.