Management of esophageal coins

Esophageal Bougienage for Management of Lodged Esophageal Coins: Safe, Effective, Efficient, and Underused

OBJECTIVES

The aims of the study are to evaluate outcomes of esophageal bougienage for management of lodged esophageal coins and to assess the extent of bougienage usage and barriers among emergency providers.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of pediatric patients with single lodged esophageal coins presenting to our single academic pediatric emergency department between November 2012 and December 2018. We compared procedural outcomes, complications, length of stay (LOS), and cost between those managed with bougienage and with endoscopy. We further surveyed emergency physicians to assess the extent of bougienage usage and barriers to utilization across different institutions.

RESULTS

We identified 205 patients with single lodged esophageal coins presenting during our study window. One hundred forty-seven patients ultimately underwent bougienage with 97% success and no major complications. Fifty-six patients were managed by endoscopy with 100% success and one major complication. Bougienage had significantly lower LOS (median 2.18 vs 11.92 hours, P < 0.001) and hospital charges (median $3533 vs $12,679, P < 0.001) compared with endoscopy. We received 242 completed surveys representing 38 states from primarily academic pediatric emergency physicians. The majority of respondents (90%) used specialist consult with only 4.5% performing bougienage. A total of 36.4% of respondents had never heard of the procedure and only 16.1% had ever performed it. Barriers to usage included lack of provider training (95.6%), perceived risk of complications (94.4%), and perceived lack of success (80.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Bougienage is safe and effective with significant LOS and cost benefits compared with endoscopy. Despite these advantages, the procedure is underused, because of lack of provider education and concerns regarding safety, efficacy, and both family and specialist preference, which are not supported by current literature. These data support the need for broader education regarding the bougienage technique, as well as larger prospective studies of its safety and outcomes.

Conservative management of oesophageal soft food bolus impaction

BACKGROUND

Impaction of a soft food bolus in the oesophagus causes dysphagia and regurgitation. If the bolus does not pass spontaneously, then the patient is at risk of aspiration, dehydration, perforation, and death. Definitive management is with endoscopic intervention, recommended within 24 hours. Prior to endoscopy, many patients undergo a period of observation, awaiting spontaneous disimpaction, or may undergo enteral or parenteral treatments to attempt to dislodge the bolus. There is little consensus as to which of these conservative strategies is safe and effective to be used in this initial period, before resorting to definitive endoscopic management for persistent impaction.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of non-endoscopic conservative treatments in the management of soft food boluses impacted within the oesophagus.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases, using relevant search terms: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL. The date of the search was 18 August 2019. We screened the reference lists of relevant studies and reviews on the topic to identify any additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of the management of acute oesophageal soft food bolus impaction, in adults and children, reporting the incidence of disimpaction (confirmed radiologically or clinically by return to oral diet) without the need for endoscopic intervention. We did not include studies focusing on sharp or solid object impaction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 890 unique records through the electronic searches. We excluded 809 clearly irrelevant records and retrieved 81 records for further assessment. We subsequently included one randomised controlled trial that met the eligibility criteria, which was conducted in four Swedish centres and randomised 43 participants to receive either intravenous diazepam followed by glucagon, or intravenous placebos. The effect of the active substances compared with placebo on rates of disimpaction without intervention is uncertain, as the numbers from this single study were small, and the rates were similar (38% versus 32%; risk ratio 1.19, 95% confidence interval 0.51 to 2.75, P = 0.69). The certainty of the evidence using GRADE for this outcome is low. Data on adverse events were lacking.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently inadequate data to recommend the use of any enteral or parenteral treatments in the management of acute oesophageal soft food bolus impaction. There is also inadequate data regarding potential adverse events from the use of these treatments, or from potential delays in definitive endoscopic management. Caution should be exercised when using any conservative management strategies in these patients.

Clinical effectiveness of bougienage for esophageal coins in a pediatric ED

OBJECTIVE

To describe a tertiary care pediatric emergency department (PED) experience with bougienage for esophageal coins.

METHODS

This was a large retrospective case series of children with esophageal coins presenting to a tertiary PED from January 2004 to October 2012. Bougienage eligibility criteria were medically stable, no prior gastro-esophageal surgery or disease, single coin, and witnessed ingestion within 24 hours. Abstracted data were age, signs and symptoms, coin type, management, efficacy, complications, returns, length of stay (LOS), and hospital charges. Main outcomes included procedural success and complications. Secondary outcomes included LOS and hospital charges.

RESULTS

There were 245 patients with esophageal coins with 136/145 (94%) successful bougienage procedures and 109/109 (100%) successful surgical retrievals. There were 18 minor complications and 5 return visits for patients with bougienage. There were 10 minor and 2 major complications with surgical retrieval. Patients undergoing bougienage were 4 years (SD 2) vs 3 years (SD 3) for surgical retrieval (P < 0.001). Mean LOS for successful bougienage was 137 minutes (SD 54) vs 769 (SD 535) for surgical retrieval. The difference in the means was 632, 95% CI for the difference in means of -723 to -541 (P < .001). Mean charges for successful bougienage were $984 (SD $576) vs. $7022 (SD $3132) for surgical retrieval. The difference in means was $6038, 95% CI -$6,580 to -$5,496 (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Esophageal bougienage is safe and highly effective. It is also more time and cost efficient than other treatment options.

An ingested foreign body: two sides of the same coin?

A 2-year-old child presented to the emergency department with an acute onset of dysphagia and stertor. A plain anteroposterior chest X-ray revealed a single circular opacity in the middle third of the oesophagus consistent with an ingested coin. The child was taken to the theatre for rigid pharyngo-oesophagoscopy and removal of the coin. After the first coin was removed subsequent endoscopic examination revealed a second coin at the same location. This extremely rare case of two ingested coins becoming impacted with perfect radiological alignment emphasises the importance of thorough examination on endoscopy and the potential limitations of an X-ray in initial assessment of an ingested foreign body.