1993
DOI: 10.1136/emj.10.4.310
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Oesophageal perforation: an unusual complication of a hypoglycaemic episode.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Older children presented with pleural effusion on CXR or were described as "gravely ill." Three case reports of adolescent patients describe the finding of mediastinal air discovered after vomiting that were treated conservatively. [10][11][12] Of note, an esophagram was not documented in 2 of the cases and was negative in the third. Without true confirmation of esophageal rupture, it is likely that these patients are more similar to the patients with spontaneous gastrointestinal-associated pneumomediastinum in our study than true Boerhaave syndrome.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Older children presented with pleural effusion on CXR or were described as "gravely ill." Three case reports of adolescent patients describe the finding of mediastinal air discovered after vomiting that were treated conservatively. [10][11][12] Of note, an esophagram was not documented in 2 of the cases and was negative in the third. Without true confirmation of esophageal rupture, it is likely that these patients are more similar to the patients with spontaneous gastrointestinal-associated pneumomediastinum in our study than true Boerhaave syndrome.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most were neonates. Older children presented with pleural effusion on CXR or were described as “gravely ill.” Three case reports of adolescent patients describe the finding of mediastinal air discovered after vomiting that were treated conservatively 10–12 . Of note, an esophagram was not documented in 2 of the cases and was negative in the third.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%