Original articles
Gastrointestinal Foreign Bodies: 14 Years of Experience in a University Clinic
Cuerpos extraños del tracto digestivo: experiencia de 14 años en una clínica universitaria
Jesus E. Nuñez-Renza
Andrea Carolina Córdoba-Guzmán
Viviana Parra-Parra
Margarita María Huertas-Quintero
Fanny Acero
Nicolás Rocha-Cortes
Claudia Corso-Bernal
Juan David Linares
Javier Preciado
Germán Carvajal
Fabio Leonel Gil-Parada
Carlos Arturo González-Salazar
Carlos Bernardo Sánchez
Fabián Emura
Luis Carlos Sabbagh.
Gastrointestinal Foreign Bodies: 14 Years of Experience in a University Clinic
Revista colombiana de Gastroenterología, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 472-478, 2023
Asociación Colombiana de Gastroenterología
Received: 08 June 2023
Accepted: 18 July 2023
Abstract
Introduction: Ingesting foreign bodies is a common medical problem, especially in the emergency department. Some small studies describe experiences in this regard.
Materials and methods: A descriptive retrospective study included patients with suspected ingestion of foreign bodies admitted to the gastroenterology and GI endoscopy service of the Clínica Universitaria Colombia between January 2007 and August 2020.
Results: The age of occurrence of the event was 18 to 95 years, and the average age was 45 years. The foreign bodies ingested and found were variable. The most frequent was fish bones, representing 64.11% of the cases, followed by chicken bones and dietary impaction. Thirty-eight percent of patients required foreign body removal; the most frequently used tool was the foreign body forceps. The primary location was the esophagus in 12.53% of cases, followed by the cricopharynx in 11.18% and the hypopharynx in 10%.
Conclusions: The Clínica Universitaria Colombia is a referral site for many gastroenterology emergencies due to its high technological level and extensive human resources. This paper probably describes the largest number of patients with this reason for consultation, which is why this retrospective descriptive study was designed. It shows the demographic characteristics, foreign body types, radiological and endoscopic findings, and associated complications, which help to provide a more accurate knowledge of this pathology.
Keywords: Foreign bodies+ endoscopy+ radiology+ complications.
Resumen
Introducción: La ingesta de cuerpos extraños es un problema médico frecuente, especialmente en el servicio de urgencias. Existen algunos estudios pequeños que describen las experiencias al respecto.
Materiales y métodos: Estudio descriptivo, retrospectivo, en el cual se incluyó a pacientes con sospecha de ingesta de cuerpos extraños, ingresados al servicio de gastroenterología y endoscopia digestiva de La Clínica Universitaria Colombia, entre enero de 2007 y agosto de 2020.
Resultados: La edad de ocurrencia del evento se presentó en pacientes desde los 18 hasta los 95 años, y la edad promedio fue de 45 años. Los cuerpos extraños ingeridos y encontrados fueron variables; los más frecuentes fueron la ingesta de espinas de pescado, que representó el 64,11% de los casos, seguido por la ingesta de huesos de pollo y la impactación alimentaria. Un 38% de los pacientes requirieron la extracción de cuerpo extraño y la herramienta usada con mayor frecuencia fue la pinza de cuerpo extraño. La localización principal fue el esófago, en el 12,53% de los casos, seguido por la cricofaringe, en el 11,18%, y la hipofaringe, en el 10%.
Conclusiones: La Clínica Universitaria Colombia es un sitio de referencia de una gran cantidad de urgencias en gastroenterología debido a su alto nivel tecnológico y al gran recurso humano que requieren. Este trabajo representa probablemente la cantidad más grande de pacientes con este motivo de consulta, razón por la que se diseñó este estudio descriptivo retrospectivo, que muestra las características demográficas, los tipos de cuerpo extraño, los hallazgos radiológicos y endoscópicos y las complicaciones asociadas, que son de utilidad para tener un conocimiento más real de esta patología.
Palabras clave: Cuerpos extraños, endoscopia, radiología, complicaciones.
Introduction
The ingestion of foreign bodies is a common medical problem, especially in the emergency department, which has greater relevance in three populations: pediatric patients, patients with some cognitive disability, and patients with psychiatric pathologies and a history of psychoactive substance use given the higher risk of complications and difficulties in extracting them1. Although these elements generally manage to pass spontaneously through the GI tract, in 20% of cases, endoscopic intervention will be required for their removal, and at least 1% of cases will require some surgical intervention2,3.
International guidelines such as those proposed by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) recommend emergent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (EGD) (in the first 2 to 6 hours after ingestion) in three main scenarios: cases of complete esophageal obstruction, sharp-pointed foreign bodies given the high risk of perforation, and the ingestion of cells or batteries due to the risk of liquefactive necrosis and perforation, especially in sites of stricture (upper esophageal sphincter, aortic arch, lower esophageal sphincter, pylorus, ileocecal valve, and anus). If these parameters are not met, it has been said that the endoscopic study can be performed urgently in the first 24 hours4.
In Colombia, ingesting foreign bodies is a frequent reason for consultation; however, there is no data to establish the incidence of this problem in the country, nor to establish the type of foreign body ingested and its most common complications. This work aims to conduct a retrospective analysis of the experience of Clínica Universitaria Colombia gastroenterology and digestive endoscopy group in ingesting foreign bodies.
Materials and methods
This descriptive, retrospective study included patients with suspected ingestion of foreign bodies admitted to the gastroenterology and digestive endoscopy department of the Clínica Universitaria Colombia between January 2007 and August 2020. The cases were identified by reviewing the medical record, the reason for consultation, the reported symptoms, the reason for requesting EGD, and the report of endoscopic procedures. After excluding those patients with incomplete data and those under 18 years of age, 2,307 patients were included in the analysis.
The following demographic, clinical, and endoscopic data were collected: age, sex, time of onset of symptoms before consultation, primary symptoms, findings on neck X-ray, type of foreign body, location of the foreign body, extraction method, and associated complications.
Results
Population characteristics
The age of occurrence was 18 to 95 years; the average age was 45 years, and the age range in which the event occurred the most was between 27 to 59 years. The female sex was predominant (62%).
Most patients consulted early within the first 24 hours of ingesting the foreign body (n = 1,786, 77.5%). The most common symptoms were feelings of discomfort (53.32%), foreign body sensation (17.21%), and dysphagia (13.4%). To a lesser extent, patients reported pain (12.8%), hypersalivation (2.56%), and dyspnea (0.5%).
Endoscopic features
The foreign bodies ingested and found were variable; the most frequent were fishbones, representing 64.11% of the cases, followed by the ingestion of chicken bones and food impaction with 17.43% and 9.19%, respectively. Table 1 summarizes reported ingested foreign bodies. Figures 1 to 4 correspond to some examples of ingested foreign bodies found during the endoscopic study.
MR: medical record.
Figure 1
Plastic ring located in the hypopharynx; 2007.
Taken from: Personal atlas of Dr. Diego Aponte.
Figure 2
Chicken bone in the esophagus; 2008.
Taken from: Personal atlas of Dr. Diego Aponte.
Figure 3
Fishbone in the esophagus; 2014.
Taken from: Personal atlas of Dr. Diego Aponte.
Figure 4
Toothbrush in the stomach; 2011.
Taken from: Personal atlas of Dr. Diego Aponte.
Imaging studies were performed in 66% of the patients before endoscopy and neck X-ray, obtaining normal results in 55.5% of the patients. It was possible to detect the foreign body in only 10.6% of the cases, and, as an additional finding, there was soft tissue edema in 48% of the cases. Figure 5 records the radiological findings.
Figure 5
Radiological findings described.
Of note is that in more than half of the cases, the foreign body was not identified for extraction (62.3%), only 38% of the patients required foreign body extraction, and the most frequently used tool was the foreign body clamp in 34.89% of the cases. The primary location was the esophagus in 12.53% of cases, followed by the cricopharynx and hypopharynx in 11.18% and 10%, respectively. Only a small percentage of patients had to undergo surgery due to suspected complications associated with the ingestion of the foreign body (n = 20, 0-87%). Figure 6 shows the location distribution of ingested foreign bodies.
Figure 6
Location of foreign bodies.
In the endoscopic studies, the most frequent findings were lacerations at the pharynx level in 35%, followed by a typical endoscopic study in 31% of cases, and lacerations in the esophagus in 10.23% of patients. These findings are shown in Table 2.
We know that the ingested objects with the highest risk of perforation are those with sharp points, mainly fishbones and chicken bones, the most commonly ingested in the population studied. Of the 1,479 patients who ingested fishbones, 2% had findings suggestive of perforation, while of the 402 patients who ingested chicken bones, 3% showed findings suggestive of perforation (Table 3).
The predominant symptoms associated with foreign bodies identified in the endoscopic study were the sensation of discomfort in 28.9% and dysphagia in 25%, which occurred in the case of ingestion of fishbones in 64%, chicken bones in 16%, and food impaction in 10.9%.
Discussion
The ingestion of foreign bodies continues to be a frequent reason for consultation and, in some circumstances, is still considered an emergency in gastroenterology. EGD is the method of choice as it is diagnostic and therapeutic3,5. It has been described that the vast majority of ingested foreign bodies, approximately 80%, manage to reach the stomach and, once there, cross the digestive tract smoothly1,2. However, we see how, in our series, it was only possible to find the ingested foreign body in 62.3% of the cases, possibly due to the early performance of endoscopic studies in our department.
Complications from foreign body ingestion are usually mild and include erosions, superficial lacerations, edema, and hematomas. However, serious complications such as perforation, mediastinitis, cardiac tamponade, and the development of fistulas may occur6. Among the risk factors for these complications, the presence of foreign bodies visible on cervical X-rays, impaction in the cricopharyngeus, and evolution of the impaction greater than 24 hours have been described6,7. The risk and severity of these complications go hand in hand with the ingested object’s characteristics and impaction site5,6. Among the most frequent sites of foreign body impaction are the esophagus, in places of anatomical narrowness (at the level of the cricopharyngeal muscle, aortic arch, and gastroesophageal junction)1, the stomach, the pharynx, and the duodenum5,7. Although imaging studies, such as cervical X-rays, are often used as part of the initial evaluation of these patients, it is known that they have a limited sensitivity in the scenario found, between 25% and 55%8.
In this series, fishbones, which are recognized for the difficult visualization both in imaging studies and in endoscopy7,8, were the most commonly ingested element and represented 64% of the cases, followed by chicken bones and food impaction, findings similar to those described in other series and reviews3,9,10. Still, radiological identification was achieved in only 10% of the cases, which speaks of the limited use of this diagnostic tool in this scenario, as described in other reports, and is of greater importance if there is suspicion of perforation11,12.
Regarding location, these foreign bodies were found most frequently at the esophagus level, followed by the cricopharynx and hypopharynx, results consistent with previous studies13-15. The clinical manifestations associated with ingesting foreign bodies are related to the site of impaction and the duration of the condition2. In this series, it is clear that the most common symptoms were foreign body sensation and dysphagia concerning foreign body impaction in the hypopharynx and esophagus.
EGD continues to be the diagnostic and therapeutic tool of choice in these cases2, which additionally has multiple tools with which the endoscopist must be familiar and achieves success rates of up to 95% for managing these patients14,15. In this series, in the patients with a foreign body, endoscopic removal was achieved, the impaction was resolved favorably in all cases, and foreign body forceps was the most used tool. Only a small percentage of patients required surgical management due to suspicion of perforation or other serious complications (0.84%), possibly related to the patients’ early intervention, which could justify emergent EGD in this scenario.
Conclusions
The ingestion of foreign bodies continues to be a frequent reason for consultation and is considered one of the emergencies in gastroenterology. While simple X-ray studies are recommended to locate the ingested foreign body, this diagnostic aid has limited use in this scenario. EGD remains the procedure of choice for visualization and removal and is safe and highly effective.
This work is probably the most extensive series published worldwide, with findings very similar to those published in other series regarding the type of foreign body ingested, location, and associated complications.
Referencias
Bekkerman M, Sachdev AH, Andrade J, Twersky Y, Iqbal S. Endoscopic Management of Foreign Bodies in the Gastrointestinal Tract: A Review of the Literature. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2016;2016:8520767. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/8520767
Sugawa C, Ono H, Taleb M, Lucas CE. Endoscopic management of foreign bodies in the upper gastrointestinal tract: A review. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;6(10):475-81. https://doi.org/10.4253/wjge.v6.i10.475
Lee CY, Kao BZ, Wu CS, Chen MY, Chien HY, Wu LW, et al. Retrospective analysis of endoscopic management of foreign bodies in the upper gastrointestinal tract of adults. J Chin Med Assoc. 2019;82(2):105-109. https://doi.org/10.1097/JCMA.0000000000000010
Birk M, Bauerfeind P, Deprez PH, Häfner M, Hartmann D, Hassan C, et al. Removal of foreign bodies in the upper gastrointestinal tract in adults: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline. Endoscopy. 2016;48(5):489-96. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-100456
Jaan A, Mulita F. Gastrointestinal Foreign Body. [Actualizado el 28 de mayo de 2022]. En: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2022. Disponible en: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK562203/
von Rahden BH, Feith M, Dittler HJ, Stein HJ. Cervical esophageal perforation with severe mediastinitis due to an impacted dental prosthesis. Dis Esophagus. 2002;15(4):340-4. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1442-2050.2002.00290.x
Okan İ, Akbaş A, Küpeli M, Yeniova AÖ, Esen M, Özsoy Z, et al. Management of foreign body ingestion and food impaction in adults: A cross-sectional study. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2019;25(2):159-66. https://doi.org/10.5505/tjtes.2018.67240
González M, Gómez M, Otero W. Cuerpos extraños en esófago. Rev Col Gastroenterol. 2006;21(3):150-61.
Geng C, Li X, Luo R, Cai L, Lei X, Wang C. Endoscopic management of foreign bodies in the upper gastrointestinal tract: a retrospective study of 1294 cases. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2017;52(11):1286-291. https://doi.org/10.1080/00365521.2017.1350284
Magalhães-Costa P, Carvalho L, Rodrigues JP, Túlio MA, Marques S, Carmo J, et al. Endoscopic Management of Foreign Bodies in the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract: An Evidence-Based Review Article. GE Port J Gastroenterol. 2015;23(3):142-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpge.2015.09.002
Guelfguat M, Kaplinskiy V, Reddy SH, DiPoce J. Clinical guidelines for imaging and reporting ingested foreign bodies. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;203(1):37-53. Erratum in: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;203(3):694. DiPoce, C Jason [corrected to DiPoce, Jason]. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.13.12185
Pinto A, Muzj C, Gagliardi N, Pinto F, Setola FR, Scaglione M, et al. Role of imaging in the assessment of impacted foreign bodies in the hypopharynx and cervical esophagus. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2012;33(5):463-70. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sult.2012.06.009
Yao CC, Wu IT, Lu LS, Lin SC, Liang CM, Kuo YH, et al. Endoscopic Management of Foreign Bodies in the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract of Adults. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:658602. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/658602
Li ZS, Sun ZX, Zou DW, Xu GM, Wu RP, Liao Z. Endoscopic management of foreign bodies in the upper-GI tract: experience with 1088 cases in China. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;64(4):485-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2006.01.059
Mosca S, Manes G, Martino R, Amitrano L, Bottino V, Bove A, et al. Endoscopic management of foreign bodies in the upper gastrointestinal tract: report on a series of 414 adult patients. Endoscopy. 2001;33(8):692-6. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2001-16212
Notes
Author notes
*Correspondence: Diego Mauricio Aponte-Martín. didimauro673@yahoo.es