Journals / Turkish journal of emergency medicine (Online) / 2021 / Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 4

May the first‑line treatment for foreign body aspiration in childhood be flexible bronchoscopy?

Pages
184–188
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

FoB may be used as the first‑line treatment modality for FB aspiration instead of RB in childhood the fact that noninvasive and nontraumatic respiratory intervention.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:INTRODUCTION: Rigid bronchoscopy (RB) is the traditional treatment in foreign body (FB) aspiration in childhood but is a traumatic and invasive procedure.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Results of success rate and complications were recorded.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:FoB may be used as the first‑line treatment modality for FB aspiration instead of RB in childhood the fact that noninvasive and nontraumatic respiratory intervention.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

INTRODUCTION: Rigid bronchoscopy (RB) is the traditional treatment in foreign body (FB) aspiration in childhood but is a traumatic and invasive procedure. However, flexible optic bronchoscopy (FoB) is a noninvasive and nontraumatic respiratory intervention. The aim of this study was to evaluate FoB as a first‑line treatment modality in pediatric cases presenting with a preliminary diagnosis of FB aspiration. METHODS: Subjects who underwent FoB under general anesthesia with the preliminary diagnosis of FB aspiration were enrolled in this cross‑sectional study. Two cases were inherited from pediatric surgery because they were not removed with FoB. The demographic, clinical, and radiological findings at the presentation were recorded. Results of success rate and complications were recorded. RESULTS: Among the FB aspiration cases age range of 7 months to 16 years. FoB demonstrated a FB in the airways of 31 (62.2%) subjects. The duration of the symptoms in the subjects was 9.1 ± 8.8 days. Three of the cases were taken over from pediatric surgery because they were not removed with RB. Most commonly encountered FB’s were organic materials (n = 20, 64%). FoB was successful in removing the FB from the proximal and also distal airways in 93% of the subjects. No significant complications and side effects were observed except post‑FoB cough. CONCLUSION: This result has shown that FoB for the treatment of FB aspiration is successful in removing FB aspiration from both the proximal and distal airway that the RB cannot remove. Furthermore, FoB did not have any significant airway complication. FoB may be used as the first‑line treatment modality for FB aspiration instead of RB in childhood the fact that noninvasive and nontraumatic respiratory intervention.

🔖

Cite This Article

YÜKSEL, H., YAŞAR, A., AÇIKEL, A., TOPÇU, İ., YILMAZ, Ö. (2021). May the first‑line treatment for foreign body aspiration in childhood be flexible bronchoscopy?. Turkish journal of emergency medicine (Online), Cilt: 21 - Sayı: 4, 184–188. https://ajindex.com/articles/414170

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

  1. CataneoAJ, CataneoDC, RuizRL. Management of tracheobronchial foreign body in children. Pediatr Surg Int 2008;24:151-6
  2. Reyes-Quintos MR. Pediatric rigid bronchoscopy for foreign body removal. Philipp J Otolaryngol Neck Surg 2009;24:39-41
  3. Cohen S, Goldberg S, Springer C, Avital A, Picard E. Foreign body aspiration in children. Harefuah 2015;154:175-7, 211
  4. Chapin MM, Rochette LM, Annest JL, Haileyesus T, Conner KA, Smith GA. Nonfatal choking on food among children 14 years or younger in the United States, 2001-2009. Pediatrics 2013;132:275-81
  5. Haddadi S, Marzban S, Nemati S, Ranjbar Kiakelayeh S, Parvizi A, Heidarzadeh A. Tracheobronchial foreign-bodies in children; A 7 year retrospective study. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol 2015;27:377-85
  6. Altkorn R, Chen X, Milkovich S, Stool D, Rider G, Bailey CM, et al. Fatal and non-fatal food injuries among children (aged 0-14 years). Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2008;72:1041-6
  7. Saki N, Nikakhlagh S, Rahim F, Abshirini H. Foreign body aspirations in infancy: A 20-year experience. Int J Med Sci 2009;6:322-8
  8. Ayed AK, Jafar AM, Owayed A. Foreign body aspiration in children: Diagnosis and treatment. Pediatr Surg Int 2003;19:485-8
  9. Yu H, Yang XY, Liu B. EMLA Cream coated on the rigid bronchoscope for tracheobronchial foreign body removal in children. Laryngoscope 2009;119:158-61
  10. Soong WJ. Pediatric interventional flexible bronchoscopy. Pediatr Respirol Crit Care Med 2018;2:38
  11. Kapoor R, Chandra T, Mendpara H, Gupta R, Garg S. Flexible bronchoscopic removal of foreign bodies from airway of children: single center experience over 12 years. Indian Pediatr 2019;56:560-2
  12. Tang LF, Xu YC, Wang YS, Wang CF, Zhu GH, Bao XE, et al. Airway foreign body removal by flexible bronchoscopy: Experience with 1027 children during 2000-2008. World J Pediatr 2009;5:191-5
  13. Sersar SI, Rizk WH, Bilal M, El Diasty MM, Eltantawy TA, Abdelhakam BB, et al. Inhaled foreign bodies: Presentation, management and value of history and plain chest radiography in delayed presentation. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2006;134:92-9
  14. Mehta RM, Rashmi N, Bajaj P, Krishnan S, Srinivasan L. Airway stenosis related to foreign body aspiration: An under-recognized long term complication. Clin Med Insights Case Rep 2019;12:1179547619863816
  15. Batra H, Yarmus L. Indications and complications of rigid bronchoscopy. Expert Rev Respir Med 2018;12:509-20
  16. Sirmali M, Türüt H, Kisacik E, Findik G, Kaya S, Taştepe I. The relatio