Foreign body ingestions in children are some of the most challenging clinical scenarios facing pediatric gastroenterologists. Determining the indications and timing for intervention requires assessment of patient size, type of object ingested, location, clinical symptoms, time since ingestion, and myriad other factors. Often the easiest and least anxiety-producing decision is the one to proceed to endoscopic removal, instead of observation alone. Because of variability in pediatric patient size, there are less firm guidelines available to determine which type of object will safely pass, as opposed to the clearer guidelines in the adult population. In addition, the imprecise nature of the histories often leaves the clinician to question the timing and nature of the ingestion. Furthermore, changes in the types of ingestions encountered, specifically button batteries and high-powered magnet ingestions, create an even greater potential for severe morbidity and mortality among children. As a result, clinical guidelines regarding management of these ingestions in children remain varied and sporadic, with little in the way of prospective data to guide their development. An expert panel of pediatric endoscopists was convened and produced the present article that outlines practical clinical approaches to the pediatric patient with a variety of foreign body ingestions. This guideline is intended as an educational tool that may help inform pediatric endoscopists in managing foreign body ingestions in children. Medical decision making, however, remains a complex process requiring integration of clinical data beyond the scope of these guidelines. These guidelines should therefore not be considered to be a rule or to be establishing a legal standard of care. Caregivers may well choose a course of action outside of those represented in these guidelines because of specific patient circumstances. Furthermore, additional clinical studies may be necessary to clarify aspects based on expert opinion instead of published data. Thus, these guidelines may be revised as needed to account for new data, changes in clinical practice, or availability of new technology.

Aerodigestive programs provide coordinated interdisciplinary care to pediatric patients with complex congenital or acquired conditions affecting breathing, swallowing, and growth. Although there has been a proliferation of programs, as well as national meetings, interest groups and early research activity, there is, as of yet, no consensus definition of an aerodigestive patient, standardized structure, and functions of an aerodigestive program or a blueprint for research prioritization. The Delphi method was used by a multidisciplinary and multi-institutional panel of aerodigestive providers to obtain consensus on 4 broad content areas related to aerodigestive care: (1) definition of an aerodigestive patient, (2) essential construct and functions of an aerodigestive program, (3) identification of aerodigestive research priorities, and (4) evaluation and recognition of aerodigestive programs and future directions. After 3 iterations of survey, consensus was obtained by either a supermajority of 75% or stability in median ranking on 33 of 36 items. This included a standard definition of an aerodigestive patient, level of participation of specific pediatric disciplines in a program, essential components of the care cycle and functions of the program, feeding and swallowing assessment and therapy, procedural scope and volume, research priorities and outcome measures, certification, coding, and funding. We propose the first consensus definition of the aerodigestive care model with specific recommendations regarding associated personnel, infrastructure, research, and outcome measures. We hope that this may provide an initial framework to further standardize care, develop clinical guidelines, and improve outcomes for aerodigestive patients.

Background and Aims Unsedated transnasal endoscopy (TNE) is safer and less costly than sedated EGD. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of TNE with biopsies in monitoring the esophageal mucosa of pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitis. Methods Patients between 8 and 17 years of age with eosinophilic esophagitis and their parents were enrolled. Unsedated TNE was performed. A 2.8-mm (1.2-mm channel) or a 4-mm flexible bronchoscope (2-mm channel) was used, and esophageal biopsy specimens were obtained. Biopsy specimen analysis, duration, adverse events, and billing charges of TNE were assessed. Immediately after TNE and a minimum of 2 weeks later, a modified Group Health Association of America 9 survey and a preference questionnaire were completed, respectively. Results Twenty-one of 22 enrolled patients underwent TNE. TNE was performed with no serious adverse events. Histopathological analysis revealed 0 eosinophils per high-power field (n = 12), fewer than 15 eosinophils per high-power field (n = 4), and more than 15 eosinophils per high-power field (n = 5). The total epithelial surface area of mucosal biopsy samples from either TNE Forceps (1.2 mm or 2 mm biopsy channel forceps) compared with those obtained during the subject’s previous EGD by using standard endoscopic forceps was not statistically different (P = .308 [1.2 mm]/P = .492 [2 mm]). All parents and 76.2% of subjects would undergo the TNE again. TNE was preferred over EGD by 85.7% of parents and 52.4% of subjects. The modified Group Health Association of America 9 survey revealed a high degree of satisfaction (average, 43.19 ± 2.6; maximum score, 45). Charges associated with TNE were 60.1% lower than for previous EGDs. Conclusions Unsedated TNE is an effective, lower-cost procedure for monitoring the esophageal mucosa of children with eosinophilic esophagitis.

Although all children had persistent aerodigestive symptoms, over 50% had not been seen by an appropriate subspecialist in the year prior to the clinic visit. The multidisciplinary evaluation resulted in new diagnoses of bronchiectasis and active reflux, which can both lead to long-term morbidity and mortality. Children with TEF require evaluation by multiple subspecialists to manage not only current symptoms but also long term risks. Ongoing care should be guided by protocols based on known risks. Pediatr Pulmonol. 2016;51:576-581. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

No abstract

No abstract

Pediatric bowel preparation protocols used before colonoscopy vary greatly, with no identified standard practice. The present clinical report reviews the evidence for several bowel preparations in children and reports on their use among North American Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition members. Publications in the pediatric literature for bowel preparation regimens are described, including mechanisms of action, efficacy and ease of use, and pediatric studies. A survey distributed to pediatric gastroenterology programs across the country reviews present national practice, and cleanout recommendations are provided. Finally, further areas for research are identified.

No abstract