Device choice and experience level in endoscopic foreign object retrieval: An in vivo study

D. O. Faigel, B. R. Stotland, M. L. Kochman, T. Hoops, T. Judge, J. Kroser, J. Lewis, W. B. Long, D. C. Metz, Christopher B O'Brien, D. B. Smith, G. G. Ginsberg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

55 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Successful foreign object retrieval may depend on device choice and the experience level of the endoscopist, although these factors have not been systematically evaluated. Methods: In anesthetized pigs, the ability to retrieve foreign objects (metal tack, button disc battery, wooden toothpick) placed endoscopically into the stomach was assessed. Seven university medical center gastroenterology attending physicians (5 clinical and 2 basic science research [BSR]), and 4 fellows-in-training participated. The devices used were the Roth retrieval net, rat tooth forceps, Dormia basket, polypectomy snare, and radial jaw forceps. The time to retrieve each object into an esophageal overtube within a 5 minute maximum was measured. Results: Only the Roth net and Dormia basket were successful in retrieving the button disc battery, although the Roth net was superior (100% vs 27%, Fisher p < 0.025). All devices were equally successful at retrieving the tack (82% to 100%, p = NS). The snare was significantly faster than the Roth net (p < 0.05). For the tack, there were significantly fewer difficulties encountered with the snare than the Roth net (Fisher p < 0.03). The Roth net was incapable of retrieving the toothpick; the other devices were equally successful (91% to 100%). The clinical attendings had a significantly higher success rate (95%) than the fellows (82%, chi squared p < 0.05) or combined fellows/BSR attendings (80%, p < 0.02), and were significantly faster than the fellows (p < 0.0002) or the fellows/BSR attendings (p < 0.0003). Conclusions: The Roth net is the best device for retrieving smooth objects such as the button disc battery. For sharp objects, such as the tack and toothpick, best results were achieved with the snare, although the forceps were also effective. More experienced endoscopists had higher success rates and faster retrieval times. Both device choice and the experience level of the endoscopist have an impact on successful foreign object retrieval.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)490-492
Number of pages3
JournalGastrointestinal Endoscopy
Volume45
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 15 1997
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Foreign Bodies
Equipment and Supplies
Surgical Instruments
Research
Gastroenterology
Jaw
Stomach
Tooth
Swine
Metals
Physicians

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Faigel, D. O., Stotland, B. R., Kochman, M. L., Hoops, T., Judge, T., Kroser, J., ... Ginsberg, G. G. (1997). Device choice and experience level in endoscopic foreign object retrieval: An in vivo study. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, 45(6), 490-492. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(97)70179-2

Device choice and experience level in endoscopic foreign object retrieval : An in vivo study. / Faigel, D. O.; Stotland, B. R.; Kochman, M. L.; Hoops, T.; Judge, T.; Kroser, J.; Lewis, J.; Long, W. B.; Metz, D. C.; O'Brien, Christopher B; Smith, D. B.; Ginsberg, G. G.

In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Vol. 45, No. 6, 15.10.1997, p. 490-492.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Faigel, DO, Stotland, BR, Kochman, ML, Hoops, T, Judge, T, Kroser, J, Lewis, J, Long, WB, Metz, DC, O'Brien, CB, Smith, DB & Ginsberg, GG 1997, 'Device choice and experience level in endoscopic foreign object retrieval: An in vivo study', Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 490-492. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-5107(97)70179-2
Faigel, D. O. ; Stotland, B. R. ; Kochman, M. L. ; Hoops, T. ; Judge, T. ; Kroser, J. ; Lewis, J. ; Long, W. B. ; Metz, D. C. ; O'Brien, Christopher B ; Smith, D. B. ; Ginsberg, G. G. / Device choice and experience level in endoscopic foreign object retrieval : An in vivo study. In: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 1997 ; Vol. 45, No. 6. pp. 490-492.
@article{50a1924cee23422c92d531d3b5ab3081,
title = "Device choice and experience level in endoscopic foreign object retrieval: An in vivo study",
abstract = "Background: Successful foreign object retrieval may depend on device choice and the experience level of the endoscopist, although these factors have not been systematically evaluated. Methods: In anesthetized pigs, the ability to retrieve foreign objects (metal tack, button disc battery, wooden toothpick) placed endoscopically into the stomach was assessed. Seven university medical center gastroenterology attending physicians (5 clinical and 2 basic science research [BSR]), and 4 fellows-in-training participated. The devices used were the Roth retrieval net, rat tooth forceps, Dormia basket, polypectomy snare, and radial jaw forceps. The time to retrieve each object into an esophageal overtube within a 5 minute maximum was measured. Results: Only the Roth net and Dormia basket were successful in retrieving the button disc battery, although the Roth net was superior (100{\%} vs 27{\%}, Fisher p < 0.025). All devices were equally successful at retrieving the tack (82{\%} to 100{\%}, p = NS). The snare was significantly faster than the Roth net (p < 0.05). For the tack, there were significantly fewer difficulties encountered with the snare than the Roth net (Fisher p < 0.03). The Roth net was incapable of retrieving the toothpick; the other devices were equally successful (91{\%} to 100{\%}). The clinical attendings had a significantly higher success rate (95{\%}) than the fellows (82{\%}, chi squared p < 0.05) or combined fellows/BSR attendings (80{\%}, p < 0.02), and were significantly faster than the fellows (p < 0.0002) or the fellows/BSR attendings (p < 0.0003). Conclusions: The Roth net is the best device for retrieving smooth objects such as the button disc battery. For sharp objects, such as the tack and toothpick, best results were achieved with the snare, although the forceps were also effective. More experienced endoscopists had higher success rates and faster retrieval times. Both device choice and the experience level of the endoscopist have an impact on successful foreign object retrieval.",
author = "Faigel, {D. O.} and Stotland, {B. R.} and Kochman, {M. L.} and T. Hoops and T. Judge and J. Kroser and J. Lewis and Long, {W. B.} and Metz, {D. C.} and O'Brien, {Christopher B} and Smith, {D. B.} and Ginsberg, {G. G.}",
year = "1997",
month = "10",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/S0016-5107(97)70179-2",
language = "English",
volume = "45",
pages = "490--492",
journal = "Gastrointestinal Endoscopy",
issn = "0016-5107",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Device choice and experience level in endoscopic foreign object retrieval

T2 - An in vivo study

AU - Faigel, D. O.

AU - Stotland, B. R.

AU - Kochman, M. L.

AU - Hoops, T.

AU - Judge, T.

AU - Kroser, J.

AU - Lewis, J.

AU - Long, W. B.

AU - Metz, D. C.

AU - O'Brien, Christopher B

AU - Smith, D. B.

AU - Ginsberg, G. G.

PY - 1997/10/15

Y1 - 1997/10/15

N2 - Background: Successful foreign object retrieval may depend on device choice and the experience level of the endoscopist, although these factors have not been systematically evaluated. Methods: In anesthetized pigs, the ability to retrieve foreign objects (metal tack, button disc battery, wooden toothpick) placed endoscopically into the stomach was assessed. Seven university medical center gastroenterology attending physicians (5 clinical and 2 basic science research [BSR]), and 4 fellows-in-training participated. The devices used were the Roth retrieval net, rat tooth forceps, Dormia basket, polypectomy snare, and radial jaw forceps. The time to retrieve each object into an esophageal overtube within a 5 minute maximum was measured. Results: Only the Roth net and Dormia basket were successful in retrieving the button disc battery, although the Roth net was superior (100% vs 27%, Fisher p < 0.025). All devices were equally successful at retrieving the tack (82% to 100%, p = NS). The snare was significantly faster than the Roth net (p < 0.05). For the tack, there were significantly fewer difficulties encountered with the snare than the Roth net (Fisher p < 0.03). The Roth net was incapable of retrieving the toothpick; the other devices were equally successful (91% to 100%). The clinical attendings had a significantly higher success rate (95%) than the fellows (82%, chi squared p < 0.05) or combined fellows/BSR attendings (80%, p < 0.02), and were significantly faster than the fellows (p < 0.0002) or the fellows/BSR attendings (p < 0.0003). Conclusions: The Roth net is the best device for retrieving smooth objects such as the button disc battery. For sharp objects, such as the tack and toothpick, best results were achieved with the snare, although the forceps were also effective. More experienced endoscopists had higher success rates and faster retrieval times. Both device choice and the experience level of the endoscopist have an impact on successful foreign object retrieval.

AB - Background: Successful foreign object retrieval may depend on device choice and the experience level of the endoscopist, although these factors have not been systematically evaluated. Methods: In anesthetized pigs, the ability to retrieve foreign objects (metal tack, button disc battery, wooden toothpick) placed endoscopically into the stomach was assessed. Seven university medical center gastroenterology attending physicians (5 clinical and 2 basic science research [BSR]), and 4 fellows-in-training participated. The devices used were the Roth retrieval net, rat tooth forceps, Dormia basket, polypectomy snare, and radial jaw forceps. The time to retrieve each object into an esophageal overtube within a 5 minute maximum was measured. Results: Only the Roth net and Dormia basket were successful in retrieving the button disc battery, although the Roth net was superior (100% vs 27%, Fisher p < 0.025). All devices were equally successful at retrieving the tack (82% to 100%, p = NS). The snare was significantly faster than the Roth net (p < 0.05). For the tack, there were significantly fewer difficulties encountered with the snare than the Roth net (Fisher p < 0.03). The Roth net was incapable of retrieving the toothpick; the other devices were equally successful (91% to 100%). The clinical attendings had a significantly higher success rate (95%) than the fellows (82%, chi squared p < 0.05) or combined fellows/BSR attendings (80%, p < 0.02), and were significantly faster than the fellows (p < 0.0002) or the fellows/BSR attendings (p < 0.0003). Conclusions: The Roth net is the best device for retrieving smooth objects such as the button disc battery. For sharp objects, such as the tack and toothpick, best results were achieved with the snare, although the forceps were also effective. More experienced endoscopists had higher success rates and faster retrieval times. Both device choice and the experience level of the endoscopist have an impact on successful foreign object retrieval.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030769121&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030769121&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0016-5107(97)70179-2

DO - 10.1016/S0016-5107(97)70179-2

M3 - Article

C2 - 9199906

AN - SCOPUS:0030769121

VL - 45

SP - 490

EP - 492

JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

SN - 0016-5107

IS - 6

ER -