Literature DB >> 3883304

Battery ingestions: product accessibility and clinical course.

T L Litovitz.   

Abstract

Results of 125 battery ingestions in 114 separate episodes over an 11-month period are analyzed. The 125 batteries included 119 button batteries and six cylindrical cells. The location of batteries just prior to ingestion (loose or discarded [48.7%], in product [34.4%], in manufacturer's battery packaging [3.4%]) determined the need for consumer education of this potential hazard. The observation that hearing aid batteries were the most common type swallowed (33.9%), and that 14 batteries were ingested by hearing-impaired children after they removed the batteries from their own aids, further directs appropriate prevention efforts. All the larger cylindrical batteries and 89.9% of the button cells passed through the gastrointestinal tract spontaneously. Endoscopic retrieval was unsuccessful in 66.7% of cases attempted. Ipecac syrup, administered to 11 patients, uniformly failed to expel the battery. Transit time was within 48 hours for 68.8% of button cells, and 85.4% of the batteries were passed by 72 hours, with a range of 12 hours to 14 days. Once beyond the esophagus, arrested battery progression failed to correlate with adverse outcome. Symptoms developed in 11 patients but were only severe in the single case of esophageal lodgment. The vast majority of battery ingestions are benign and can be managed without endoscopic or surgical intervention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1985        PMID: 3883304

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatrics        ISSN: 0031-4005            Impact factor:   7.124


  16 in total

Review 1.  Severe esophageal damage due to button battery ingestion: can it be prevented?

Authors:  D Yardeni; H Yardeni; A G Coran; E S Golladay
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2004-06-22       Impact factor: 1.827

2.  Disintegration of mercury disc cells in simulated gastric juice: implications for management of disc cell ingestion.

Authors:  J L Taylor; M S Hockey; A Rhodes; M E Smith; S Hughes; R A Braithwaite
Journal:  Arch Emerg Med       Date:  1990-06

3.  How to manage poisonings in pediatric patients: Preventing accidental deaths.

Authors:  D A Kent
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 3.275

4.  Management of children who have swallowed button batteries.

Authors:  T J David; A P Ferguson
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  1986-04       Impact factor: 3.791

5.  Imaging button battery ingestions and insertions in children: a 15-year single-center review.

Authors:  Brian S Pugmire; Tom K Lin; Scott Pentiuk; Alessandro de Alarcon; Catherine K Hart; Andrew T Trout
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2016-11-23

Review 6.  Oesophageal perforation after button battery ingestion.

Authors:  A C Gordon; M H Gough
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 1.891

7.  Swallowed button batteries: is there a consensus on management?

Authors:  J G Studley; I P Linehan; A L Ogilvie; B L Dowling
Journal:  Gut       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 23.059

Review 8.  Foreign body ingestion: children like to put objects in their mouth.

Authors:  H Hesham A-Kader
Journal:  World J Pediatr       Date:  2010-11-16       Impact factor: 2.764

9.  Bowel perforation by crumpled paper in a patient presenting with acute abdominal pain.

Authors:  Alireza Bakhshaeekia; Seyed M V Hosseini; Tannaz Razmi; Alireza Shamsaeefar
Journal:  Saudi J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 2.485

Review 10.  Acquired tracheo-esophageal fistulas caused by button battery lodged in the esophagus.

Authors:  Mustafa Imamoğlu; Ali Cay; Polat Koşucu; Ali Ahmetoğlu; Haluk Sarihan
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2004-05-18       Impact factor: 1.827

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.