Main Logo
Logo

Society for Pediatric Radiology – Poster Archive

  4
  0
  0
 
 


Final ID: Poster #: SCI-041

Utilization of Imaging for Detecting Ingested and Aspirated Foreign Bodies: Proposed Changes to Imaging Protocols for Food-related Cases

Purpose or Case Report: Ingested foreign bodies (FB) are frequently encountered in the pediatric population, whether accidental or deliberate and may lodge in the airways or esophagus. Metallic FB (e.g., coins, button batteries, magnets) are radio-opaque and easily detected on radiographs, conversely non-metallic objects (e.g., plastic toys, food) are radiolucent and often require CT, leading to diagnostic delays. The purpose of this study is to assess sensitivity for chest radiography and chest CT for endoscopically proven airway and esophageal food and non-food FBs.
Methods & Materials: This retrospective observational study examined pediatric patients (aged 0-18 years) with ingested FB (both airway and GI tract up to the stomach) treated at a tertiary care hospital between October 2021 and September 2024. Data were extracted for patients undergoing FB removal through upper GI endoscopy (CPT 43247) or bronchoscopy (CPT 31635), and who had undergone chest radiographs (CXR) or CT within 24 hours prior. Patients were categorized into three groups: CXR only, CT only, or both CXR and CT, with findings recorded from both imaging and procedure reports including FB type- food vs non-food, location etc. Sensitivity was calculated for each modality overall and for food vs. non-food FB subgroups.
Results: Of the 225 endoscopy cases, 58 (25.8%) involved airway FB, while 164 (72.9%) involved esophageal FB. Sensitivity for detecting airway FB was 30% for CXR and 97.4% for CT. Sensitivity for esophageal FB was 79.2% for CXR and 95.8% for CT. Food-related FB comprised 52 (23.1%) of cases, while non-food FB comprised 141 (62.7%) cases. CXR sensitivity for identifying food FB was 3%, while for non-food FB it was 82.2%. CT demonstrated 97.6% and 95.3% sensitivity for food and non-food FB, respectively.
Conclusions: CT is more sensitive than CXR, especially for detecting airway and food-related FB. Low-dose CT should be prioritized for known non-metallic or food FB, while XR may be appropriate for known metallic FB or as an initial imaging for unknown suspected FB, with CT used if XR findings are inconclusive.
  • Patel, Khushbu  ( Texas Children's Hospital , Houston , Texas , United States )
  • Sher, Andrew  ( Texas Children's Hospital , Houston , Texas , United States )
  • Kan, J.  ( Texas Children's Hospital , Houston , Texas , United States )
Meeting Info:
Session Info:

Posters - Scientific

Thoracic Imaging

SPR Posters - Scientific

More abstracts on this topic:
Two Cases of Bezoar in an Infant and Young Child with Emphasis on Ultrasound to Improve Diagnostic Accuracy

Dawani Anuradha, Jagani Sumit

Assessing the Diagnostic Accuracy of Automated 3D Kidney Measurements in Detecting Urinary Tract Dilations

Sultan Laith, Morales-tisnés Tatiana, Rouet Laurence, Jago James, Sridharan Anush, Otero Hansel, Darge Kassa, Back Susan

More abstracts from these authors:
Clinical Decision Support in Pediatric Imaging: Results from a Quaternary Care Pediatric Emergency Center

Sher Andrew, Hayatghaibi Shireen, Kan J., Sammer Marla

Clinical Decision Support has no Effect on Payer Claim Denials

Sher Andrew, Hayatghaibi Shireen, Kan J., Sammer Marla

Preview
Poster____SCI-041.pdf
You have to be authorized to contact abstract author. Please, Login or Signup.

Please note that this is a separate login, not connected with your credentials used for the SPR main website.

Not Available

Comments

We encourage you to join the discussion by posting your comments and questions below.

Presenters will be notified of your post so that they can respond as appropriate.

This discussion platform is provided to foster engagement, and stimulate conversation and knowledge sharing.

Please click here to review the full terms and conditions for engaging in the discussion, including refraining from product promotion and non-constructive feedback.

 

You have to be authorized to post a comment. Please, Login or Signup.

Please note that this is a separate login, not connected with your credentials used for the SPR main website.


   Rate this abstract  (Maximum characters: 500)