Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Imaging button battery ingestions and insertions in children: a 15-year single-center review

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Recent studies have shown an increase in morbidity associated with button battery ingestions in children.

Objective

To perform a comprehensive, imaging-focused review of all patients with confirmed button battery ingestions/insertions imaged at our institution in the last 15 years.

Materials and methods

Radiology reports from Jan. 1, 2000, to July 12, 2015, were searched for the terms “battery” and “batteries.” Confirmed cases of battery ingestion/insertion for which images were available were reviewed. Cases were reviewed for imaging studies performed, imaging findings, patient demographics, clinical history and management. Two pediatric gastroenterologists reviewed endoscopic images and graded mucosal injuries in selected cases.

Results

Two hundred seventy-six cases were reviewed. All patients were imaged with radiography, 19 with fluoroscopy (6.8%), and 4 with CT (1.4%). Batteries retained in the esophagus (n = 27, 9.8%) were larger in diameter on average than those that had passed distally (22.1 ± 3.3 mm vs. 13.7 ± 1.6 mm, P<0.0001). Battery diameter ≥20 mm was associated with esophageal impaction (P<0.0001) and higher grade esophageal injury (P<0.0001). Mean battery diameter was greater for patients with grade 1 or higher mucosal injury than for patients with no mucosal injury (22.1 ± 2.1 mm vs. 14.7 ± 4.5 mm, P<0.0001). Sixteen percent (4/25) of patients with grade ≥1 esophageal injury had batteries in the stomach on initial imaging. Five patients (1.8%) had serious clinical complications (e.g., esophageal perforation, tracheoesophageal fistula).

Conclusion

Button batteries >20mm in diameter warrant increased clinical scrutiny due to higher likelihood and severity of injury. Implementation of recent pediatric gastroenterology societal guidelines will likely lead to a substantial increase in the number of CT and MRI examinations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Votteler TP, Nash JC, Rutledge JC (1983) The hazard of ingested alkaline disk batteries in children. JAMA 249:2504–2506

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Litovitz T (1983) Button battery ingestions. A review of 56 cases. JAMA 249:2495

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Litovitz TL (1985) Battery ingestions: product accessibility and clinical course. Pediatrics 75:469–476

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Litovitz T, Schmitz BF (1992) Ingestion of cylindrical and button batteries: an analysis of 2382 cases. Pediatrics 89:747–757

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Thompson N, Lowe-Ponsford F, Mant TG et al (1990) Button battery ingestion: a review. Adverse Drug React Acute Poisoning Rev 9:157–180

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Litovitz T, Whitaker N, Clark L (2010) Preventing battery ingestions: an analysis of 8648 cases. Pediatrics 125:1178–1183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Litovitz T, Whitaker N, Clark L et al (2010) Emerging battery-ingestion hazard: clinical implications. Pediatrics 125:1168–1177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sharpe SJ, Rochette LM, Smith GA (2012) Pediatric battery-related emergency department visits in the United States, 1990–2009. Pediatrics 129:1111–1117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Jatana KR, Litovitz T, Reilly JS et al (2013) Pediatric button battery injuries: 2013 task force update. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 77:1392–1399

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Brumbaugh DE, Colson SB, Sandoval JA et al (2011) Management of button battery induced hemorrhage in children. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 52:585–589

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hamilton JM, Schraff SA, Notrica DM (2009) Severe injuries from coin cell battery ingestions: 2 case reports. J Pediatr Surg 44:644–647

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2012) Injuries from batteries among children aged <13 years--United States, 1995–2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 61:661–666

    Google Scholar 

  13. Kramer RE, Lerner DG, Lin T et al (2015) Management of ingested foreign bodies in children: a clinical report of the NASPGHAN Endoscopy Committee. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 60:562–574

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Zargar SA, Kochhar R, Mehta S et al (1991) The role of fiberoptic endoscopy in the management of corrosive ingestion and modified endoscopic classification of burns. Gastrointest Endosc 37:165–169

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Leinwand K, Brumbaugh DE, Kramer RE (2016) Button battery ingestion in children: a paradigm for management of severe pediatric foreign body ingestions. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 26:99–118

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Cetinkaya EA, Arslan İB, Cukurova İ (2015) Nasal foreign bodies in children: types, locations, complications and removal. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 79:1881–1885

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Guidera AK, Stegehuis HR (2010) Button batteries: the worst case scenario in nasal foreign bodies. N Z Med J 123:68–73

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bakshi SS, Coumare VN, Priya M et al (2016) Long-term complications of button batteries in the nose. J Emerg Med 50:485–487

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Ave., Cincinnati, OH, 45229, USA

    Brian S. Pugmire & Andrew T. Trout

  2. Division of Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA

    Tom K. Lin & Scott Pentiuk

  3. Department of Pediatric Otolaryngology, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA

    Alessandro de Alarcon & Catherine K. Hart

  4. Department of Otolaryngology––Head and Neck Surgery, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA

    Alessandro de Alarcon & Catherine K. Hart

Authors
  1. Brian S. Pugmire
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tom K. Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Scott Pentiuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alessandro de Alarcon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Catherine K. Hart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Andrew T. Trout
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew T. Trout.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pugmire, B.S., Lin, T.K., Pentiuk, S. et al. Imaging button battery ingestions and insertions in children: a 15-year single-center review. Pediatr Radiol 47, 178–185 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-016-3751-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-016-3751-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation