BACKGROUND: Esophageal foreign body impaction (EFBI) is a common problem requiring urgent endoscopy. EFBI may be the first sign of underlying esophageal pathology, yet mucosal biopsies are rarely performed. METHODS: We report a retrospective analysis of 572 children requiring removal of an EFBI over a 12-year period by pediatric otolaryngologists (ENT), surgeons (PS), and gastroenterologists (PGI). The method of removal [direct laryngoscopy (DL), rigid endoscopy (RE), flexible endoscopy (FE)], type of foreign body (inanimate or food), whether mucosal biopsies were performed, and histologic findings of biopsy samples were recorded for each patient. RESULTS: Foreign body removal was most commonly performed by PGI (298 [52 %]); the remaining were equally distributed between ENT (136 [24 %]) and PS (138 [24 %]). The method of foreign body removal used by ENT was RE (89 %), DL (8 %), and FE (3 %). Pediatric surgery preferred FE (62 %), followed by RE (27 %) and DL (11 %). Pediatric gastroenterology used FE exclusively. Esophageal biopsies were never performed by ENT or PS; PGI performed esophageal biopsies more commonly in children with meat bolus impactions (50 %) than in children with inanimate foreign bodies (12 %). Mucosal pathology was more common in children with meat bolus impaction (100 %) than in children with inanimate foreign bodies (45 %). CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal mucosal biopsy should be considered for all children with EFBI not attributed to stricture, particularly those with meat bolus impaction.
BACKGROUND: Esophageal foreign body impaction (EFBI) is a common problem requiring urgent endoscopy. EFBI may be the first sign of underlying esophageal pathology, yet mucosal biopsies are rarely performed. METHODS: We report a retrospective analysis of 572 children requiring removal of an EFBI over a 12-year period by pediatric otolaryngologists (ENT), surgeons (PS), and gastroenterologists (PGI). The method of removal [direct laryngoscopy (DL), rigid endoscopy (RE), flexible endoscopy (FE)], type of foreign body (inanimate or food), whether mucosal biopsies were performed, and histologic findings of biopsy samples were recorded for each patient. RESULTS: Foreign body removal was most commonly performed by PGI (298 [52 %]); the remaining were equally distributed between ENT (136 [24 %]) and PS (138 [24 %]). The method of foreign body removal used by ENT was RE (89 %), DL (8 %), and FE (3 %). Pediatric surgery preferred FE (62 %), followed by RE (27 %) and DL (11 %). Pediatric gastroenterology used FE exclusively. Esophageal biopsies were never performed by ENT or PS; PGI performed esophageal biopsies more commonly in children with meat bolus impactions (50 %) than in children with inanimate foreign bodies (12 %). Mucosal pathology was more common in children with meat bolus impaction (100 %) than in children with inanimate foreign bodies (45 %). CONCLUSIONS:Esophageal mucosal biopsy should be considered for all children with EFBI not attributed to stricture, particularly those with meat bolus impaction.
Authors: Jimmy Lao; Howard E Bostwick; Stuart Berezin; Michael S Halata; Leonard J Newman; Marvin S Medow Journal: Pediatr Emerg Care Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 1.454
Authors: Glenn T Furuta; Chris A Liacouras; Margaret H Collins; Sandeep K Gupta; Chris Justinich; Phil E Putnam; Peter Bonis; Eric Hassall; Alex Straumann; Marc E Rothenberg Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2007-08-08 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Girish S Hiremath; Fatimah Hameed; Ann Pacheco; Anthony Olive; Carla M Davis; Robert J Shulman Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2015-06-12 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Robert Russell; Alan Lucas; Joffre Johnson; Govarhana Yannam; Russell Griffin; Elizabeth Beierle; Scott Anderson; Mike Chen; Carroll Harmon Journal: Pediatr Surg Int Date: 2014-02-19 Impact factor: 1.827