Therapeutic effect of esophageal foreign body extraction management: flexible versus rigid endoscopy in 216 adults of Beijing.

Abstract

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness and complications of rigid endoscopy (RE) and flexible endoscopy (FE) for the extraction of esophageal foreign bodies (FB) in adults.Material/MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on the medical records of 216 adult patients with esophageal FB impaction treated at Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China, between January 2008 and December 2012.ResultsThe success rate of FB extraction was 100% (142/142) in patients treated with RE compared to 97.3% (72/74) in those treated with FE (P=0.045). The total incidence of complications in RE-treated patients was lower than that in FE-treated patients (28.2% vs. 45.9%, P=0.009), but the perforation rate was higher (5.6% vs. 1.4%, P=0.135). The incidences of total complications and perforation were associated with the duration of FB impaction in patients who underwent RE (both P<0.05) but not in patients who underwent FE. RE was more frequently used in extraction of FBs located in the upper esophagus (88.7%, 126/142) compared to FE (60.8%, 45/74) (P<0.05). The size of extracted FB was significantly larger in patients treated with FE compared to those treated with RE (P<0.05).ConclusionsBoth RE and FE were effective in the extraction of esophageal FB. However, the perforation rate and the need for general anesthesia were higher in RE-associated extraction. FE may be the preferred endoscopic treatment for the extraction of esophageal FB, except possibly for those impacted in the upper esophagus. FB extraction may produce better outcomes if endoscopy is employed early.