The Accuracy of Digital Radiography for Diagnosis of Fishbone Foreign Bodies in the Throat

Abstract

Introduction Some patients with a fishbone as a foreign body of difficult diagnosis may require further investigations. Generally, radiography is used as the first choice for finding the fishbone.

Objective The objective of this study is to determine the accuracy of digital radiography for diagnosis of fishbone foreign body in the throat

Methods This descriptive experimental study design has three phases. In the first phase, we assessed subject contrast and visibility of fishbone on a homogeneous background; as for the second phase, we evaluated the embedded fishbone in the fresh cadaver's throat. In the last phase, we studied the accuracy of radiography in diagnosing the fishbone foreign body at any site of the cadaver's throat.

Results The subject contrast of 15 fishbones ranged from 0.94 to 0.99. All types of fishbone were obvious in the first phase, whereas, in the second phase, visibility of fishbone was varied. The subject contrast and diameter of fishbone did not show statistically significant correlation with visibility (p = 0.09 and p = 0.24, respectively). In the third phase, embedded fishbone in the base of tongue was detected with the highest accuracy (sensitivity of 1.00 (95%CI: 0.44–1.00) and specificity of 0.92 (95%CI: 0.65–0.99)); whereas, the tonsil was of difficult interpretation with poorest diagnostic value (sensitivity of 0.00 (95%CI: 0.00–0.56) and specificity of 1.00 (95%CI: 0.76–1.00)).

Conclusion The digital radiography provides the highest accuracy and benefit to the diagnosis of a fishbone foreign body at the base of the tongue; whereas, the tonsil was of difficult interpretation.

Keywords

fishbone - foreign body - radiography - sensitivity - specificity

• References

• 1 Nandi P, Ong GB. Foreign body in the oesophagus: review of 2394 cases. Br J Surg 1978; 65 (01) 5-9
• 2 Atchariyasathian V, Tanormkiat V. Detection of foreign bodies in the digestive tract,using rigid esophagoscopy and the plain film soft tissue neck x-ray. Songkla Med J 2003; 21 (01) 45-51
• 3 Kumar M, Joseph G, Kumar S, Clayton M. Fishbone as a foreign body. J Laryngol Otol 2003; 117 (07) 568-569
• 4 Lue AJ, Fang WD, Manolidis S. Use of plain radiography and computed tomography to identify fishbone foreign bodies. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000; 123 (04) 435-438
• 5 Jackson CL. Foreign bodies in air and food passages. Postgrad Med 1948; 4 (04) 281-290
• 6 Palme CE, Lowinger D, Petersen AJ. Fishbones at the cricopharyngeus: a comparison of plain-film radiology and computed tomography. Laryngoscope 1999; 109 (12) 1955-1958
• 7 Davies WR, Bate PJ. Relative radio-opacity of commonly consumed fish species in South East Queensland on lateral neck x-ray: an ovine model. Med J Aust 2009; 191 (11-12): 677-680
• 8 Abdullah BJ, Kaur H, Ng KH. An in vitro study comparing two different film-screen combinations in the detection of impacted fishbones. Br J Radiol 1998; 71 (849) 930-933
• 9 Ell SR, Sprigg A, Parker AJ. A multi-observer study examining the radiographic visibility of fishbone foreign bodies. J R Soc Med 1996; 89 (01) 31-34
• 10 Ell SR, Sprigg A. The radio-opacity of fishbones--species variation. Clin Radiol 1991; 44 (02) 104-107
• 11 Hone SW, Fenton J, Clarke E, Hamilton S, McShane D. The radio-opacity of fishbones: a cadaveric study. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci 1995; 20 (03) 234-235