• Qiang Chen, Yuanquan Huang, Yongyou Wu, Kui Zhao, Baosong Zhu, Tengfei He, and Chungen Xing.
• Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu, China.
• Ulus Travma Acil Cer. 2015 Mar 1;21(2):107-12.

BackgroundLittle was known about gastrointestinal perforation secondary to foreign body in adults, which was only documented by several case series reports. The aim of this study was to characterize it with comparative methods.MethodsA retrospective study was conducted on twenty patients with the diagnosis of gastrointestinal perforation secondary to foreign body between January 2003 and October 2013. The perforations were all located in the small intestine and compared to eighty-seven patients with non-traumatic small intestinal perforation.Results35% of the patients in the foreign body group were over 65 years of age, which is much higher than the local elderly population ratio (p=0.002). In the foreign body group, more patients presented without diffuse abdominal physical signs (p=0.008) and preoperational CT scans had higher accuracy (p=0.027). Perforation repair was performed more often (p=0.024). Mean MPI was 19.9 and the morbidity rate was 35%, significantly lower than in the cases of other causes (p=0.001, 0.041). Mean duration of hospitalization was 11.5 days and was shorter compared to other causes (p=0.038).ConclusionClinical performance of small intestinal perforation secondary to foreign body is atypical, and preoperative diagnosis relies on CT scans. Primary perforation closure is safe and effective, and relatively better outcomes can be achieved.

27 keywords...

hide…