Published online Dec 6, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i23.5988
Peer-review started: August 30, 2020
First decision: September 13, 2020
Revised: September 15, 2020
Accepted: September 25, 2020
Article in press: September 25, 2020
Published online: December 6, 2020
Processing time: 95 Days and 20.2 Hours
Since 2017, the number of magnet ingestion cases has increased year over year in our hospital. Almost all of the ingested magnetic foreign bodies were magnetic beads, and most of the patients experienced intestinal perforations, causing substantial damage.
To summarize our experience with surgical treatment of multiple magnet ingestion in children.
The data for general surgeries were collected from January 2010 to April 2020, and the clinical characteristics, treatment methods, and outcomes were summarized and analyzed. Several typical cases were selected and discussed.
Fifty-six cases of ingested magnetic foreign bodies were collected, of which 47 were magnetic beads. The average patient age was 4.7 ± 3.0 years old. The number of ingested magnetic foreign bodies ranged from 2 to 73. There were 26 cases with symptoms at the time of admission, including two cases of shock. Thirteen patients were discharged successfully following conservative treatment and 43 were treated by surgery. Laparotomy was the main method of operation. Laparoscopy was used in four cases, of which three were converted to open surgery, and one was treated successfully using surgery through the navel. Postoperative complications occurred in seven cases, incision infections were observed in six, and adhesive ileus was observed in one.
Clinicians need to summarize their experiences with treating magnetic foreign body ingestions in detail and carry out clinical research to reduce the damage to children.
Core Tip: Since 2017, the numbers of magnet ingestion has increased year over year in our hospital and most of the patients experienced intestinal perforations. We found several significant clinical features: Intestinal contents did not leak into the abdominal cavity, and gastrointestinal symptoms were caused by ileus rather than perforation, which were obviously different from intestinal perforation caused by other reasons. This means that the traditional treatment strategy cannot be used simply to deal with intestinal perforation caused by magnetic beads, and a more favorable treatment scheme should be selected according to its clinicopathological characteristics.