ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2026
Clinical features and surgical treatment of magnetic bead ingestion in children: a single-center retrospective study.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To summarize the clinical features, complications, radiological characteristics, surgical management, and prognosis of magnetic bead ingestion (MBI) in children, and to propose a treatment-modality algorithm focused on selecting among endoscopic, laparoscopic, open, and combined surgical approaches. Method: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 24 pediatric MBI cases treated at the Capital Center for Children's Health, Capital Medical University, from January 2020 to October 2025. Data on demographics, ingestion details, clinical manifestations, laboratory and imaging findings, surgical procedures, intraoperative findings, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Results: The cohort comprised 15 boys and 9 girls (median age, 5.5 years; range, 1 year 1 month-11 years). Abdominal pain was the most common symptom (12 cases, 50.0%), followed by vomiting (9 cases, 37.5%); 10 children (41.7%) were asymptomatic. Among 14 children with intestinal perforation, elevated white blood cell count was observed in 8 (57.1%), elevated neutrophil percentage in 8 (57.1%), and elevated C-reactive protein in 6 (42.9%); notably, two perforation cases had all three markers within normal limits. Complications included intestinal adhesions (11 cases), perforation (14 cases), obstruction (3 cases), and necrosis (3 cases). Upright abdominal X-ray was the primary diagnostic modality (17 cases, 70.8%), followed by CT (4 cases, 16.7%) and ultrasound (2 cases, 8.3%). Eighteen children (75%) underwent surgery: laparoscopic exploration converted to open surgery (8 cases, 44.4%), converted to open surgery combined with gastroscopy (1 cases, 5.6%), completely laparoscopic surgery (5 cases, 27.8%), laparoscopic combined with gastroscopy (2 cases, 11.1%), and direct open surgery (2 cases, 11.1%); the remaining 6 cases experienced spontaneous bead expulsion. Conclusion: Magnetic bead ingestion in children can easily lead to severe intestinal injury. Clinical interventions should be individualized based on the location and number of foreign bodies as well as the presence of complications. Laparoscopic exploration is an important diagnostic and minimally invasive treatment approach, allowing flexible intraoperative decisions regarding conversion to open surgery or combination with endoscopy based on the actual situation. For children requiring surgical treatment, early intervention is key to improving prognosis.
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.