Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2022; 26(03): e401-e406
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1735567
Original Research

Diagnostic Performance of Digital Radiograph and Low-Dose Computed Tomography for the Diagnosis of Fishbone Retention in the Oropharynx

Jirapa Chansangrat 
1   School of Radiology, Medical Institute, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand
› Author Affiliations Funding Suranaree University of Technology.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Introduction Fishbone foreign body retention is one of the most common problem with various clinical manifestations from asymptomatic, abscess formation, and perforation to mediastinitis with subsequence morbidity and mortality. Accurately identifying the location of the fishbone leads to precise removal, which, in turn, prevents serious consequences. Digital radiographs have been widely used for diagnosis, but many studies show poor sensitivity.

Object The present study was designed to compare the diagnostic performances of digital radiograph and low-dose computed tomography (CT) for fishbone retention and to demonstrate the radiation dose of the two modalities.

Methods We collected 2 pieces of fishbone from each of the 15 species commonly eaten in Southeast Asia. We embedded each fishbone in a fresh pig's neck, then subjected the pig's neck to lateral soft tissue neck digital radiograph. The locations to embed included tonsil, base of tongue, and upper esophagus. Then, we subjected the same specimen to a CT scan. Two experienced radiologists interpreted each image.

Results Visibility in the digital radiograph group was 13%, and in CT images group, it was 87% regardless of the locations. The average radiation dose from digital radiographs was 0.4 mGy (radiation dose field), while from CT images it was 8.6 mGy (CT dose index).

Conclusion Most of the common fishbones in Southeast Asia could not be visualized by digital radiograph when embedded in the neck. Computed tomography scans demonstrated better diagnostic performance of fishbone retention compared to digital radiographs, regardless of the embedded location.

Keywords

fishbone - oropharyngeal - esophageal - foreign body - diagnostic performance - CT - digital radiograph


Publication History

Received: 05 March 2021

Accepted: 04 August 2021

Article published online:
08 November 2021

© 2021. Fundação Otorrinolaringologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • References

  • 1 Kim HU. Oroesophageal fishbone foreign body. Clin Endosc 2016; 49 (04) 318-326
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Klein A, Ovnat-Tamir S, Marom T, Gluck O, Rabinovics N, Shemesh S. Fishbone foreign body: the role of imaging. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2019; 23 (01) 110-115
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Dray X, Cattan P. Foreign bodies and caustic lesions. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 2013; 27 (05) 679-689
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Venkatesh SH, Venkatanarasimha Karaddi NK. CT findings of accidental fishbone ingestion and its complications. Diagn Interv Radiol 2016; 22 (02) 156-160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kim JP, Kwon OJ, Shim HS, Kim RB, Kim JH, Woo SH. Analysis of clinical feature and management of fishbone ingestion of upper gastrointestinal tract. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol 2015; 8 (03) 261-267
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Chiu HS, Chung CH. Management of foreign bodies in throat: an emergency department's perspective. Hong Kong J Emerg Med 2002; 9: 126-130
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Sanei-Moghaddam A, Sanei-Moghaddam A, Kahrobaei S. Lateral soft tissue x-ray for patients with suspected fishbone in oropharynx, a thing in the past. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol 2015; 27 (83) 459-462
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Kasemsiri P, Mahawerawat K, Ratanaanekchai T, Puttarak W, Munkong W. The accuracy of digital radiography for diagnosis of fishbone foreign bodies in the throat. Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2017; 21 (03) 255-258
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Qureshi TA, Awan MS, Hussain M, Wasif M. Effectiveness of plain X-ray in detection of fish and chicken bone foreign body in upper aerodigestive tract. J Pak Med Assoc 2017; 67 (04) 544-547
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Woo SH, Kim KH. Proposal for methods of diagnosis of fishbone foreign body in the Esophagus. Laryngoscope 2015; 125 (11) 2472-2475
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Schmid AI, Uder M, Lell MM. Reaching for better image quality and lower radiation dose in head and neck CT: advanced modeled and sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction in combination with tube voltage adaptation. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 2017; 46 (01) 20160131 DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20160131.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Gao N, Cui X, Sun G, Zhang G, Zhou G, Zhao X. Comparative anatomy of pig arytenoid cartilage and human arytenoid cartilage. J Voice 2019; 33 (05) 620-626 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2018.02.015.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar