Intestinal perforation caused by multiple magnet ingestion

Çördük, Nergül; Odabas, Seniha Esin; Sarioglu-Buke, Akile

doi:10.4103/0189-6725.129249

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Intestinal perforation is typically caused by ingested FBs that are sharp and elongated, such as nuts, fish bone and toothpicks, which can easily pierce the intestine . Moreover, multiple ingested magnets can lead to ischemia and necrosis of the bowel wall . Most ingested FBs that lead to intestinal obstruction are relatively large and sticky, which made it difficult to discharge by themselves.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Injuries due to foreign body ingestion and insertion in children: 10 years of experience at a single institution

Shao

Shen

Hong

et al. 2019

J Paediatrics Child Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: Foreign body (FB) injuries represent a severe public health problem during childhood. The aim of this study was to report our experience with patients with injuries due to FB ingestion and insertion who were treated surgically at our institution. Methods: A total of 78 paediatric patients who were hospitalised for FB injuries were retrospectively reviewed. Results: The series was composed of 27 males and 51 females, with a median age of 3.6 years. The cases included 35 cases of FB ingestion and 43 cases of FB insertion, including 40 cases with a vaginal insertion, 2 cases with a rectal insertion and 1 case with a urethra insertion. Intestinal perforation (n = 26) was a more common complication than intestinal obstruction (n = 9) in patients who had ingested a FB. The main clinical symptom was persistent vaginal discharge, followed by vaginal bleeding for patients with a vaginal FB insertion. Exploratory laparotomy was performed on 36 patients, while a laparoscopic approach was employed in 1 patient. Forty patients underwent hysteroscopy and one patient underwent cystotomy to remove the FB. All FBs were successfully removed. Of the 78 FBs recovered, 26 were food objects, while non-food objects were found in 52 patients. All patients recovered well, except one patient with an intestinal obstruction from adhesions that occurred approximately 1 month after discharge. Conclusions: Early recognition of FB injuries and appropriate management can significantly reduce complications. Surgical removal of a FB can be safe and effective, and relatively better outcomes can be achieved.What is already known on this topic 1 Foreign body (FB) injuries represent a severe public health problem during childhood. 2 Some FB injuries have an unclear history and non-specific clinical presentation, resulting in a delay in diagnosis.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Injuries due to foreign body ingestion and insertion in children: 10 years of experience at a single institution

Shao

Shen

Hong

et al. 2019

J Paediatrics Child Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of the 14 cases in this series, 2 cases ingested a single magnetic foreign body while the remaining 12 cases misingested multiple magnetic foreign bodies, which accounted for as high as 85.7% among the 14 children with MFBM. This is a higher proportion compared to the 67% of children who mis-ingested multiple magnets or additional metal foreign bodies reported by Sola et al 7 . Therefore, in view of the occurrence rate of multiple magnetic foreign bodies and its possible serious complication, the proportion of surgical operations is higher than other kind of foreign bodies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

Clinical characteristics of magnetic foreign body misingestion in children

Huang

Hong

Tai

et al. 2021

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Magnetic foreign body misingestion (MFBM) is now occurring more frequently. It may cause remarkable mortality and morbidity in children. A retrospective analysis of the clinical data of children admitted to Xiamen Children’s Hospital between March 2017 and July 2020 due to accidental MFBM. A total of 14 children who had MFBM were collected, the proportion between urban and rural areas was 8:6, and the ratio of male to female was 6:1. The age ranged from 1.2 to 8.9 years (median 4.6 years). The number of magnetic foreign bodies ingested by mistake is 1 to 17 (average 6.5). Magnetic foreign objects are divided into magnets (3 cases) + magnetic beads (11 cases). About 40% (5/14) of this patient series showed no available misingestion history. Management includes: 4 cases of open surgery (including 1 case of laparoscopic transfer to operation), 3 cases of laparoscopic surgery, 2 cases of gastroscopy, 5 cases of conservative treatment of foreign bodies discharged through the anus. Of the 7 surgical cases, 6 cases presented with intestinal obstruction and intestinal perforation (at least 1 intestinal perforation and at most 5). Abdominal sonography has limitations in the detection of magnetic foreign bodies in the digestive tract. The proportion of laparoscopic surgery in the 7 surgical cases is nearly half. All surgical cases recovered smoothly after treatment. Our experience shows that MFBM is a big issue for the small children! The early symptoms of MFBM are often atypical especially among young children and MFBM may lead to severe adverse events. We proposed a management strategy for MFBM in children. We advise pediatricians/emergency physicians, parents/children’s guardians and society should raise the collaborated alertness of MFBM. Global awareness of risk prevention of magnetic material accidental ingestion cannot be overemphasized.

show abstract

“…The approach in pediatric cases with the possibility of foreign body swallowing determined by several parameters; type of the object, the time elapsed after swallowing and the clinical condition of the patient (7). Although it has been reported that the time between magnet intake and the development of complications is between a few days and 7 days, there are also studies indicating that this interval may be longer (8,9). Except for parents and caregivers who witness ingestion, diagnosis may be delayed because most children are asymptomatic rather than show nonspecific findings such as feeding problems or irritability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%