World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 372–377 | Cite as

Perforation of the Gastrointestinal Tract Secondary to Ingestion of Foreign Bodies

  • Brian K.P. Goh
  • Pierce K.H. Chow
  • Hak-Mien Quah
  • Hock-Soo Ong
  • Kong-Weng Eu
  • London L.P.J. Ooi
  • Wai-Keong Wong
Article

Abstract

Introduction

Ingesting a foreign body (FB) is not an uncommon occurrence. Most pass through the gastrointestinal (GI) tract uneventfully, and perforation is rare. The aim of this study was to report our experience with ingested FB perforations of the GI tract treated surgically at our institution.

Methods

A total of 62 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for an ingested FB perforation of the GI tract between 1990 and 2005 were retrospectively reviewed. Three patients with no definite FB demonstrated intraoperatively were included.

Results

The patients had a median age of 58 years, and 37 (60%) were male. Of the 59 FBs recovered, 55 (93%) were toothpicks and dietary FBs such as fish bones or bone fragments. A definitive preoperative history of FB ingestion was obtained for only two patients, and 36 of 52 patients (69%) wore dentures. Altogether, 18 (29%) perforations occurred in the anus or distal rectum, and 44 perforations were intraabdominal, with the most common abdominal site being the distal ileum (39%). Patients with FB perforations in the stomach, duodenum, and large intestine were significantly more likely to be afebrile (P = 0.043), to have chronic symptoms (> 3 days) (P < 0.001), to have a normal total white blood cell count (P < 0.001), and to be asymptomatic or present with an abdominal mass or abscess (P < 0.001) compared to those with FB perforations in the jejunum and ileum.

Conclusions

Ingested FB perforation in the adult population is most commonly secondary to unconscious accidental ingestion and is frequently caused by dietary FBs especially fish bones. A preoperative history of FB ingestion is thus rarely obtained, although wearing dentures is a common risk factor. FB perforations of the stomach, duodenum, and large intestine tend to present with a longer, more innocuous clinical picture than perforations in the jejunum or ileum.

References

  1. 1.
    Ginzburg L, Beller AJ. The clinical manifestations of non-metallic perforating intestinal foreign bodies. Ann Surg 1927;86:918–939Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ashby BS, Hunger-Craig ID. Foreign body perforation of the gut. Br J Surg 1967;54:382–384PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Velitchkov AG, Grigorov GI, Losanoff JE, et al. Ingested foreign bodies of the gastrointestinal tract: retrospective analysis of 542 cases. World J Surg 1996;20:1001–1005CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Madrona AP, Hernandez JA, Prats MC, et al. Intestinal perforation by foreign bodies. Eur J Surg 2000;166:307–309Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goh BK, Tan YM, Lin SE, et al. Utility of CT scan in the diagnosis of fish bone perforations of the gastrointestinal tract. AJR Am J Roentgenol (in press)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    McCanse DE, Kurchin A, Hinshaw JR. Gastrointestinal foreign bodies. Am J Surg 1981;142:335–337CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maleki M, Evans WE. Foreign-body perforation of the intestinal tract: report of 12 cases and review of the literature. Arch Surg 1970;101:474–477Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    McPherson RC, Karlon M, Williams RD. Foreign body perforations of the intestinal tract. Am J Surg 1957;94:564–566CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    MacManus JE. Perforation of the intestine by ingested foreign body. Am J Surg 1941;53:393–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ward McQuaid JN. Perforation of the intestine by swallowed foreign body. Br J Surg 1952;37:349–351Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hashmonai M, Kaufman T, Schramer A. Silent perforations of the stomach and duodenum by needles. Arch Surg 1978;113:1406–1409PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Henderson FF, Gaston EA. Ingested foreign body in the gastrointestinal tract. Arch Surg 1938;36:66–95Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Goh BK, Yong WS, Yeo AW. Pancreatic and hepatic abscess secondary to fish bone perforation of the duodenum. Dig Dis Sci 2005;50:1103–1106PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Horii K, Yamazaki O, Matsuyama M, et al. Successful treatment of a hepatic abscess that formed secondary to fish bone penetration by percutaneous transhepatic removal of the foreign body: report of a case. Surg Today 1999;29:922–926PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bunker PG. The role of dentistry in problems of foreign body in the air and food passage. J Am Dent Assoc 1962;64:782–787PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Carp L. Foreign bodies in the intestine. Ann Surg 1927;85:575–591Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goh BK, Jeyaraj PR, Chan HS, et al. A case of fish bone perforation of the stomach mimicking a locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma. Dig Dis Sci 2004;49:1935–1937PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lambert A. Abscess of the liver of unusual origin. NY Med J 1898;February:177–178Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Coulier B, Tancredi MH, Ramboux A. Spiral CT and multidetector-row CT diagnosis of perforation of the small intestine caused by ingested foreign bodies. Eur Radiol 2004;14:1918–1925CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ngan JH, Fok PJ, Lai EC, et al. A prospective study on fish bone ingestion: experience of 358 patients. Ann Surg 1989;211:459–462Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian K.P. Goh
    • 1
  • Pierce K.H. Chow
    • 1
    • 2
  • Hak-Mien Quah
    • 3
  • Hock-Soo Ong
    • 1
    • 2
  • Kong-Weng Eu
    • 3
  • London L.P.J. Ooi
    • 1
    • 2
  • Wai-Keong Wong
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of SurgerySingapore General HospitalSingapore
  2. 2.Department of Surgical OncologyNational Cancer CentreSingapore
  3. 3.Department of Colorectal SurgerySingapore General HospitalSingapore

Personalised recommendations