↓ Skip to main content

Pediatric foreign bodies and their management

Overview of attention for article published in Current Gastroenterology Reports, May 2005
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
246 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
Title
Pediatric foreign bodies and their management
Published in
Current Gastroenterology Reports, May 2005
DOI 10.1007/s11894-005-0037-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marsha Kay, Robert Wyllie

Abstract

Ingestion of foreign bodies is a common pediatric problem, with more than 100,000 cases occurring each year. The vast majority of pediatric ingestions are accidental; increasing incidence of intentional ingestions starts in the adolescent age group. In the United States, the most common pediatric foreign bodies ingested are coins, followed by a variety of other objects, including toys, toy parts, sharp objects, batteries, bones, and food. In adolescents and adults, meat or food impactions are the most common accidental foreign body ingestion. Esophageal pathology underlies most cases of food impaction. Management of foreign body ingestions varies based on the object ingested, its location, and the patient's age and size. Esophageal foreign bodies as a group require early intervention because of their potential to cause respiratory symptoms and complications, esophageal erosions, or even an aortoesophageal fistula. Ingested batteries that lodge in the esophagus require urgent endoscopic removal even in the asymptomatic patient due to the high risk of complications. Sharp foreign bodies increase the foreign body complication rate from less than 1% to 15% to 35%, except for straight pins, which usually follow a relatively benign course unless multiple pins are ingested. Magnets are increasingly ingested, due to their ubiquitous nature and the perception that they do not pose a risk. Ingestion of multiple magnets creates a significant risk of obstruction, perforation, and fistula development. Methods to deal with foreign bodies include the suture technique, the double snare technique, and the combined forceps/snare technique for long, large, and sharp foreign bodies, along with newer equipment, such as retrieval nets and a variety of specialized forceps.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 98 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 18 18%
Student > Master 13 13%
Student > Postgraduate 10 10%
Researcher 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Other 20 20%
Unknown 21 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 61%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 23 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 December 2010.
All research outputs
#8,571,053
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Current Gastroenterology Reports
#3
of 3 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,598
of 70,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Gastroenterology Reports
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.9. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 70,221 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.