Yo Ishihara, Chikamasa Ichita, Ryuhei Jinushi, Akiko Sasaki
{"title":"计算机断层扫描检测误食泡罩包装的临床评估:单中心回顾性研究","authors":"Yo Ishihara, Chikamasa Ichita, Ryuhei Jinushi, Akiko Sasaki","doi":"10.1002/deo2.406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>Blister pack (BP) ingestion poses serious risks, such as gastrointestinal perforation, and accurate localization by computed tomography (CT) is a common practice. However, while it has been reported in vitro that CT visibility varies with the material type of BPs, there have been no reports on this variability in clinical settings. In this study, we investigated the CT detection rates of different BPs in clinical settings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This single-center retrospective study from 2010 to 2022 included patients who underwent endoscopic foreign body removal for BP ingestion. The patients were categorized into two groups for BP components, the polypropylene (PP) and the polyvinyl chloride (PVC)/polyvinylidene chloride (PVDC) groups. The primary outcome was the comparison of CT detection rates between the groups. We also evaluated whether the BPs contained tablets and analyzed their locations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>This study included 61 patients (15 in the PP group and 46 in the PVC/PVDC group). Detection rates were 97.8% for the PVC/PVDC group compared to 53.3% for the PP group, a significant difference (<i>p</i> < 0.01). No cases of BPs composed solely of PP were detected by CT. Blister packs were most commonly found in the upper thoracic esophagus.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Even in a clinical setting, the detection rates of PVC and PVDC were higher than that of PP alone. Identifying PP without tablets has proven challenging in clinical. Considering the risk of perforation, these findings suggest that esophagogastroduodenoscopy may be necessary, even if CT detection is negative.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":93973,"journal":{"name":"DEN open","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11248714/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical assessment of computed tomography for detecting ingested blister packs: A single-center retrospective study\",\"authors\":\"Yo Ishihara, Chikamasa Ichita, Ryuhei Jinushi, Akiko Sasaki\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/deo2.406\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>Blister pack (BP) ingestion poses serious risks, such as gastrointestinal perforation, and accurate localization by computed tomography (CT) is a common practice. However, while it has been reported in vitro that CT visibility varies with the material type of BPs, there have been no reports on this variability in clinical settings. In this study, we investigated the CT detection rates of different BPs in clinical settings.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>This single-center retrospective study from 2010 to 2022 included patients who underwent endoscopic foreign body removal for BP ingestion. The patients were categorized into two groups for BP components, the polypropylene (PP) and the polyvinyl chloride (PVC)/polyvinylidene chloride (PVDC) groups. The primary outcome was the comparison of CT detection rates between the groups. We also evaluated whether the BPs contained tablets and analyzed their locations.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>This study included 61 patients (15 in the PP group and 46 in the PVC/PVDC group). Detection rates were 97.8% for the PVC/PVDC group compared to 53.3% for the PP group, a significant difference (<i>p</i> < 0.01). No cases of BPs composed solely of PP were detected by CT. Blister packs were most commonly found in the upper thoracic esophagus.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>Even in a clinical setting, the detection rates of PVC and PVDC were higher than that of PP alone. Identifying PP without tablets has proven challenging in clinical. Considering the risk of perforation, these findings suggest that esophagogastroduodenoscopy may be necessary, even if CT detection is negative.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93973,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"DEN open\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11248714/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"DEN open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/deo2.406\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DEN open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/deo2.406","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:摄入泡罩包装(BP)会带来严重风险,如胃肠道穿孔,而通过计算机断层扫描(CT)进行准确定位是一种常见做法。然而,虽然有报告称体外 CT 可见度随 BP 的材料类型而变化,但在临床环境中却没有关于这种变化的报告。在这项研究中,我们调查了临床环境中不同 BP 的 CT 检出率:这项单中心回顾性研究的研究时间为 2010 年至 2022 年,研究对象包括因摄入 BP 而接受内窥镜异物取出术的患者。根据 BP 成分将患者分为两组,即聚丙烯(PP)组和聚氯乙烯(PVC)/聚偏二氯乙烯(PVDC)组。主要结果是比较两组之间的 CT 检出率。我们还评估了 BP 是否含有药片,并分析了药片的位置:本研究共纳入 61 例患者(PP 组 15 例,PVC/PVDC 组 46 例)。PVC/PVDC组的检出率为97.8%,而PP组为53.3%,差异显著(P < 0.01)。CT 未发现仅由 PP 组成的 BP 病例。水泡包最常见于上胸段食管:结论:即使在临床环境中,PVC 和 PVDC 的检出率也高于单纯 PP 的检出率。事实证明,在临床上识别无药片的 PP 具有挑战性。考虑到穿孔的风险,这些研究结果表明,即使 CT 检测结果为阴性,也有必要进行食管胃十二指肠镜检查。
Clinical assessment of computed tomography for detecting ingested blister packs: A single-center retrospective study
Objectives
Blister pack (BP) ingestion poses serious risks, such as gastrointestinal perforation, and accurate localization by computed tomography (CT) is a common practice. However, while it has been reported in vitro that CT visibility varies with the material type of BPs, there have been no reports on this variability in clinical settings. In this study, we investigated the CT detection rates of different BPs in clinical settings.
Methods
This single-center retrospective study from 2010 to 2022 included patients who underwent endoscopic foreign body removal for BP ingestion. The patients were categorized into two groups for BP components, the polypropylene (PP) and the polyvinyl chloride (PVC)/polyvinylidene chloride (PVDC) groups. The primary outcome was the comparison of CT detection rates between the groups. We also evaluated whether the BPs contained tablets and analyzed their locations.
Results
This study included 61 patients (15 in the PP group and 46 in the PVC/PVDC group). Detection rates were 97.8% for the PVC/PVDC group compared to 53.3% for the PP group, a significant difference (p < 0.01). No cases of BPs composed solely of PP were detected by CT. Blister packs were most commonly found in the upper thoracic esophagus.
Conclusions
Even in a clinical setting, the detection rates of PVC and PVDC were higher than that of PP alone. Identifying PP without tablets has proven challenging in clinical. Considering the risk of perforation, these findings suggest that esophagogastroduodenoscopy may be necessary, even if CT detection is negative.