Alessandro de Alarcon · Imaging button battery ingestions and insertions in children: a 15-year single-center review
Follow
Article1 min read·Published Nov 2017Older

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

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov shows its articles on its own site.

Read the article on pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov ↗

Article · Nov 2017 · 1 min read

In brief

In brief

Fifteen-year radiographic review of 276 pediatric button battery cases reveals batteries ≥20mm diameter significantly increase risk of esophageal impaction and severe mucosal injury. Study demonstrates critical role of imaging in identifying high-risk ingestions requiring urgent endoscopic removal.

Written by the GCMD Library team from the article.

Alessandro de Alarcon

Background: Recent studies have shown an increase in morbidity associated with button battery ingestions in children. Objective: To perform a comprehensive, imaging-focused review of all patients with confirmed button battery ingestions/insertions imaged at our institution in the last 15 years. Materials And Methods: Radiology reports from Jan. 1, 2000, to July 12, 2015, were searched for the terms "battery" and "batteries." Confirmed cases of battery ingestion/insertion for which images were available were reviewed. Cases were reviewed for imaging studies performed, imaging findings, patient demographics, clinical history and management. Two pediatric gastroenterologists reviewed endoscopic images and graded mucosal injuries in selected cases. Results: Two hundred seventy-six cases were reviewed. All patients were imaged with radiography, 19 with fluoroscopy (6.8%), and 4 with CT (1.4%). Batteries retained in the esophagus (n = 27, 9.8%) were larger in diameter on average than those that had passed distally (22.1 ± 3.3 mm vs. 13.7 ± 1.6 mm, P<0.0001). Battery diameter ≥20 mm was associated with esophageal impaction (P<0.0001) and higher grade esophageal injury (P<0.0001). Mean battery diameter was greater for patients with grade 1 or higher mucosal injury than for patients with no mucosal injury (22.1 ± 2.1 mm vs. 14.7 ± 4.5 mm, P<0.0001). Sixteen percent (4/25) of patients with grade ≥1 esophageal injury had batteries in the stomach on initial imaging. Five patients (1.8%)

Read it at the source ↗

Try
Intelligent Search· scoped to this article · not medical adviceSearch the whole library →