Differences between intentional and accidental ingestion of foreign body in China
Abstract Backgrounds Previous reports of foreign-body ingestion focused primarily on accidental ingestion and very few studies focused on intentional ingestion of foreign body (FB) in China. Our study aimed to compare the prevalence of different age, gender, types, locations and management of FB ing...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2020-04-01
|
Series: | BMC Gastroenterology |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12876-020-01224-z |
id |
doaj-3dc0b989975146f0a7b13a597b2e3773 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-3dc0b989975146f0a7b13a597b2e37732020-11-25T03:59:17ZengBMCBMC Gastroenterology1471-230X2020-04-012011610.1186/s12876-020-01224-zDifferences between intentional and accidental ingestion of foreign body in ChinaYe Zong0Haiying Zhao1Can Sun2Ming Ji3Yongdong Wu4Shutian Zhang5Yongjun Wang6Department of Gastroenterology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical UniversityDepartment of Gastroenterology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical UniversityDepartment of Gastroenterology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical UniversityDepartment of Gastroenterology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical UniversityDepartment of Gastroenterology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical UniversityDepartment of Gastroenterology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical UniversityDepartment of Gastroenterology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical UniversityAbstract Backgrounds Previous reports of foreign-body ingestion focused primarily on accidental ingestion and very few studies focused on intentional ingestion of foreign body (FB) in China. Our study aimed to compare the prevalence of different age, gender, types, locations and management of FB ingested between intentional ingestion and accidental ingestion of FB in Northern China. Methods A retrospective case series studied all patients with suspected FB ingestion in Digestive Endoscopy Center of Beijing Friendship Hospital, between January 2011 and January 2019. The patients were divided into 2 groups. Group A included the patients who intentionally ingested FBs, and Group B included the patients who accidentally ingested FBs. Patients’ database (demographics, past medical history, characteristics of FB, endoscopic findings and treatments) were reviewed. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS software. Results Group A consisted of 77 prisoners, 2 suspects and 11 psychologically disabled persons. Group B consisted of 1020 patients with no prisoners, suspects or psychologically disabled persons. In Group A, there were no food-related foreign bodies, and the majority of FBs were metallic objects (54.44%). However in Group B, food-related FBs were the most common (91.37%). In Group A, 58 cases (64.44%) were located in the stomach, while in Group B, 893 cases (87.55%) were located in the esophagus (P < 0.05). 1096 patients successfully underwent endoscopic removal and 14 failed, including 9 cases in Group A and 5 cases in Group B. The duration of FBs impaction was longer in Group A than that in Group B (P < 0.05). Conclusions In our study, the patients who intentionally ingested FB were mainly prisoners, FBs were mostly sharp metallic objects, the duration of FBs impaction was longer, and the rate of successful endoscopic treatment was lower than that of the general population. Attention should be focused on these patients.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12876-020-01224-zForeign bodyIntentional ingestionUpper gastrointestinal tractEndoscopy |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Ye Zong Haiying Zhao Can Sun Ming Ji Yongdong Wu Shutian Zhang Yongjun Wang |
spellingShingle |
Ye Zong Haiying Zhao Can Sun Ming Ji Yongdong Wu Shutian Zhang Yongjun Wang Differences between intentional and accidental ingestion of foreign body in China BMC Gastroenterology Foreign body Intentional ingestion Upper gastrointestinal tract Endoscopy |
author_facet |
Ye Zong Haiying Zhao Can Sun Ming Ji Yongdong Wu Shutian Zhang Yongjun Wang |
author_sort |
Ye Zong |
title |
Differences between intentional and accidental ingestion of foreign body in China |
title_short |
Differences between intentional and accidental ingestion of foreign body in China |
title_full |
Differences between intentional and accidental ingestion of foreign body in China |
title_fullStr |
Differences between intentional and accidental ingestion of foreign body in China |
title_full_unstemmed |
Differences between intentional and accidental ingestion of foreign body in China |
title_sort |
differences between intentional and accidental ingestion of foreign body in china |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
BMC Gastroenterology |
issn |
1471-230X |
publishDate |
2020-04-01 |
description |
Abstract Backgrounds Previous reports of foreign-body ingestion focused primarily on accidental ingestion and very few studies focused on intentional ingestion of foreign body (FB) in China. Our study aimed to compare the prevalence of different age, gender, types, locations and management of FB ingested between intentional ingestion and accidental ingestion of FB in Northern China. Methods A retrospective case series studied all patients with suspected FB ingestion in Digestive Endoscopy Center of Beijing Friendship Hospital, between January 2011 and January 2019. The patients were divided into 2 groups. Group A included the patients who intentionally ingested FBs, and Group B included the patients who accidentally ingested FBs. Patients’ database (demographics, past medical history, characteristics of FB, endoscopic findings and treatments) were reviewed. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS software. Results Group A consisted of 77 prisoners, 2 suspects and 11 psychologically disabled persons. Group B consisted of 1020 patients with no prisoners, suspects or psychologically disabled persons. In Group A, there were no food-related foreign bodies, and the majority of FBs were metallic objects (54.44%). However in Group B, food-related FBs were the most common (91.37%). In Group A, 58 cases (64.44%) were located in the stomach, while in Group B, 893 cases (87.55%) were located in the esophagus (P < 0.05). 1096 patients successfully underwent endoscopic removal and 14 failed, including 9 cases in Group A and 5 cases in Group B. The duration of FBs impaction was longer in Group A than that in Group B (P < 0.05). Conclusions In our study, the patients who intentionally ingested FB were mainly prisoners, FBs were mostly sharp metallic objects, the duration of FBs impaction was longer, and the rate of successful endoscopic treatment was lower than that of the general population. Attention should be focused on these patients. |
topic |
Foreign body Intentional ingestion Upper gastrointestinal tract Endoscopy |
url |
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12876-020-01224-z |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT yezong differencesbetweenintentionalandaccidentalingestionofforeignbodyinchina AT haiyingzhao differencesbetweenintentionalandaccidentalingestionofforeignbodyinchina AT cansun differencesbetweenintentionalandaccidentalingestionofforeignbodyinchina AT mingji differencesbetweenintentionalandaccidentalingestionofforeignbodyinchina AT yongdongwu differencesbetweenintentionalandaccidentalingestionofforeignbodyinchina AT shutianzhang differencesbetweenintentionalandaccidentalingestionofforeignbodyinchina AT yongjunwang differencesbetweenintentionalandaccidentalingestionofforeignbodyinchina |
_version_ |
1724454806820487168 |