Paediatric nasal foreign body in calabar: a review of 5 - years experience

Characteristics of Nasal Foreign Bodies and Equipment on Complications During Removal Procedures

“…Unlike forceps and hooks, tips of suction, paper clips, and cotton swabs are blunt, and these are less likely to pierce the mucosa if the patient suddenly moves (Figure 4). 1,14,16 The effectiveness of suction has been reported in previous studies 8,11 . However, the safety and effectiveness of paper clips and cotton swabs have not been reported.…”

“…Nasal foreign bodies sometimes cause intranasal infections or fall into the pharynx and ingestion 2,7 . Although many studies have described various techniques and equipment to remove nasal foreign bodies, few studies have evaluated the relationship between equipment, associated factors, and the incidence of complications 4,8 . This retrospective study describes the characteristics of nasal foreign bodies, equipment and the incidence of complications, indicating that the incidence of epistaxis differs depending on the inserted duration of nasal foreign body and equipment used for removal.…”

“…In other patients, foreign bodies can be removed in an outpatient setting although awake, the same as in previous studies 3,5,9,10 . Because awake patients might move violently during the removal procedure, appropriate equipment should be selected to optimize successful removal without pushing the foreign body posterior or causing mucosal damage and epistaxis 2,8 . Among the commonly used equipment, such as forceps, hooks, and suction, and specialized equipment for removing nasal foreign bodies, effective equipment was selected considering its advantages and disadvantages 13–15 …”

“…In addition to the low incidence of complications, suction, paper clips, and cotton swabs have the advantage that they are available even in medical facilities without otolaryngology departments 9,16 . In contrast, equipment such as hook, curette, and Jobson‐Horne's probe developed for special procedures might be available only in facilities where the otolaryngology departments are present 4,8,9 . From the viewpoint of high versatility, suction, paper clips, and cotton swabs can be considered beneficial for foreign body removal, especially when specialized equipment is unavailable.…”

“…3,5,9,10 Because awake patients might move violently during the removal procedure, appropriate equipment should be selected to optimize successful removal without pushing the foreign body posterior or causing mucosal damage and epistaxis. 2,8 Among the commonly used equipment, such as forceps, hooks, and suction, and specialized equipment for removing nasal foreign bodies, effective equipment was selected considering its advantages and disadvantages. [13][14][15] Forceps, represented by the Hartmann alligator forceps used in our facility, were the most frequently used equipment to grasp and remove the nasal foreign body because they were small and suitable for intranasal manipulation and effective in removing foreign bodies located anteriorly.…”