We have located links that may give you full text access.
Imaging button battery ingestions and insertions in children: a 15-year single-center review.
Pediatric Radiology 2017 Februrary
BACKGROUND: Recent studies have shown an increase in morbidity associated with button battery ingestions in children.
OBJECTIVE: To perform a comprehensive, imaging-focused review of all patients with confirmed button battery ingestions/insertions imaged at our institution in the last 15 years.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radiology reports from Jan. 1, 2000, to July 12, 2015, were searched for the terms "battery" and "batteries." Confirmed cases of battery ingestion/insertion for which images were available were reviewed. Cases were reviewed for imaging studies performed, imaging findings, patient demographics, clinical history and management. Two pediatric gastroenterologists reviewed endoscopic images and graded mucosal injuries in selected cases.
RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-six cases were reviewed. All patients were imaged with radiography, 19 with fluoroscopy (6.8%), and 4 with CT (1.4%). Batteries retained in the esophagus (n = 27, 9.8%) were larger in diameter on average than those that had passed distally (22.1 ± 3.3 mm vs. 13.7 ± 1.6 mm, P<0.0001). Battery diameter ≥20 mm was associated with esophageal impaction (P<0.0001) and higher grade esophageal injury (P<0.0001). Mean battery diameter was greater for patients with grade 1 or higher mucosal injury than for patients with no mucosal injury (22.1 ± 2.1 mm vs. 14.7 ± 4.5 mm, P<0.0001). Sixteen percent (4/25) of patients with grade ≥1 esophageal injury had batteries in the stomach on initial imaging. Five patients (1.8%) had serious clinical complications (e.g., esophageal perforation, tracheoesophageal fistula).
CONCLUSION: Button batteries >20mm in diameter warrant increased clinical scrutiny due to higher likelihood and severity of injury. Implementation of recent pediatric gastroenterology societal guidelines will likely lead to a substantial increase in the number of CT and MRI examinations.
OBJECTIVE: To perform a comprehensive, imaging-focused review of all patients with confirmed button battery ingestions/insertions imaged at our institution in the last 15 years.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radiology reports from Jan. 1, 2000, to July 12, 2015, were searched for the terms "battery" and "batteries." Confirmed cases of battery ingestion/insertion for which images were available were reviewed. Cases were reviewed for imaging studies performed, imaging findings, patient demographics, clinical history and management. Two pediatric gastroenterologists reviewed endoscopic images and graded mucosal injuries in selected cases.
RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-six cases were reviewed. All patients were imaged with radiography, 19 with fluoroscopy (6.8%), and 4 with CT (1.4%). Batteries retained in the esophagus (n = 27, 9.8%) were larger in diameter on average than those that had passed distally (22.1 ± 3.3 mm vs. 13.7 ± 1.6 mm, P<0.0001). Battery diameter ≥20 mm was associated with esophageal impaction (P<0.0001) and higher grade esophageal injury (P<0.0001). Mean battery diameter was greater for patients with grade 1 or higher mucosal injury than for patients with no mucosal injury (22.1 ± 2.1 mm vs. 14.7 ± 4.5 mm, P<0.0001). Sixteen percent (4/25) of patients with grade ≥1 esophageal injury had batteries in the stomach on initial imaging. Five patients (1.8%) had serious clinical complications (e.g., esophageal perforation, tracheoesophageal fistula).
CONCLUSION: Button batteries >20mm in diameter warrant increased clinical scrutiny due to higher likelihood and severity of injury. Implementation of recent pediatric gastroenterology societal guidelines will likely lead to a substantial increase in the number of CT and MRI examinations.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Infection versus disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus patients with fever.BMC rheumatology. 2024 August 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app