PEDIATRICS Vol. 75 No. 3 March 1985, pp. 469-476
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Litovitz, T. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Litovitz, T. L.

Battery Ingestions: Product Accessibility and Clinical Course

Toby L. Litovitz MD1

1 From the National Capital Poison Center, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC

Results of 125 battery ingestions in 114 separate episodes over an 11-month period are analyzed. The 125 batteries included 119 button batteries and six cylindrical cells. The location of batteries just prior to ingestion (loose or discarded [48.7%], in product [34.4%], in manufacturer's battery packaging [3.4%]) determined the need for consumer education of this potential hazard. The observation that hearing aid batteries were the most common type swallowed (33.9%), and that 14 batteries were ingested by hearing-impaired children after they removed the batteries from their own aids, further directs appropriate prevention efforts. All the larger cylindrical batteries and 89.9% of the button cells passed through the gastrointestinal tract spontaneously. Endoscopic retrieval was unsuccessful in 66.7% of cases attempted. Ipecac syrup, administered to 11 patients, uniformly failed to expel the battery. Transit time was within 48 hours for 68.8% of button cells, and 85.4% of the batteries were passed by 72 hours, with a range of 12 hours to 14 days. Once beyond the esophagus, arrested battery progression failed to correlate with adverse outcome. Symptoms developed in 11 patients but were only severe in the single case of esophageal lodgment. The vast majority of battery ingestions are benign and can be managed without endoscopic or surgical intervention.

Key Words: button batteries • disk batteries • foreign body ingestions • pediatric poisonings

Accepted on April 24, 1984




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Am Board Fam MedHome page
V. Vijaysadan, M. Perez, and D. Kuo
Revisiting Swallowed Troubles: Intestinal Complications Caused by Two Magnets--A Case Report, Review and Proposed Revision to the Algorithm for the Management of Foreign Body Ingestion
J Am Board Fam Med, September 1, 2006; 19(5): 511 - 516.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum Exp ToxicolHome page
P T Mallon, J S White, and R L E Thompson
Systemic absorption of lithium following ingestion of a lithium button battery
Human and Experimental Toxicology, April 1, 2004; 23(4): 193 - 195.
[Abstract] [PDF]