Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42412084›Full record

ArticleUlusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES2026

Management of patients who ingest razor blades: a singlecenter experience.

Yahya Alperen Bayraktar, Kazım Gemici

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Yahya Alperen BayraktarDepartment of General Surgery, Aksaray University Faculty of Medicine, Aksaray-Türkiye.
Kazım GemiciDepartment of General Surgery, Aksaray University Faculty of Medicine, Aksaray-Türkiye.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic approaches, treatment modalities, and clinical outcomes of patients presenting to the emergency department following razor blade ingestion.

methodsHospital records of patients who presented to the emergency department with razor blade ingestion and were referred to the General Surgery Clinic between 2021 and 2024 were retrospectively reviewed. Data collected included demographics, presenting symptoms, time to presentation, number of ingested razor blades, imaging findings, treatment approaches, complications, and clinical outcomes.

resultsA total of 72 patients with complete medical records were included. All patients were male and incarcerated. The mean age was 31.2 years, and the mean time to presentation was 8 hours. The mean number of ingested razor blades was 1.4. Endoscopic intervention was performed in seven patients (10%) in whom imaging localized the razor blade to the stomach; all presented within 6 hours of ingestion. Successful endoscopic removal was achieved in two patients, while no razor blade was visualized in the stomach in five patients. Surgical intervention was required in two patients (3%). A total of 63 patients (87%) recovered without intervention with outpatient conservative management and follow-up. Successful endoscopic removal was achieved in patients who presented within the first 2 hours. No morbidity or mortality was observed.

conclusionA conservative management is safe and effective in most cases of razor blade ingestion. Early endoscopy may decrease the likelihood of surgical intervention.

Indexed as

Foreign BodiesAdolescentAdultEmergency Service, HospitalEndoscopyHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesStomachTreatment OutcomeYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID42412084
PMCPMC13401178

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.