Table 1

 Characteristics of included studies

Author, date and countryPatient groupStudy typeReference standardOutcome measuresComments
MFB, metal foreign body.
Muensterer OJ et al, 2004, Germany65 consecutive children presenting to an ED over 20 months with suspected or witnessed MFB ingestionDiagnosticSerial radiographs (abdomen +/− chest +/− neck)Presence or absence of MFB on scan. MFB localisation to chest or abdomenUzman Tracker IV® model. Coins present in 25 patients. 2 false positives
Schalamon J et al, 2004, Austria53 consecutive children presenting to an ED with suspected MFB ingestionDiagnosticChest radiographPresence or absence of MFB on scan. MFB localisation to chest or abdomen.MV9 Proxxon model®. Coins present in 34 patients
Younger R et al, 2001, US26 children referred from EDs with radiologically proven oesophageal coins (at least 6 hours earlier)DiagnosticRepeat radiographs of chest and abdomenMFB localisation to chest or abdomenGarrett Super-Scanner® model. 1 patient refused 2nd radiograph and was excluded from the study. Coins present in 25 patients.
Gooden E et al, 2000, Canada10 children presenting to an ED with suspected foreign body ingestion, or transferred from another centreDiagnosticRepeat radiographs of chest, neck, and abdomenMFB localisation to chest or abdomenHeiman MHG model.® Investigators were not blinded to radiographs of transferred patients. Coins present in 9 patients
Bassett KE et al, 1999, US62 consecutive children presenting to an ED with suspected coin ingestion, and 29 children referred with radiographically proven oesophageal coin (at time of referral)DiagnosticSerial radiographs (chest +/− abdomen +/− neck)Presence or absence of coin on scan. Coin localisation to chest or abdomen.Garrett Super-Scanner® model. Operators received <1 min of training. Coins present in 54 of the patients presenting directly to the ED. 1 coin not identified in the oesophagus. 1 oesophageal coin incorrectly localised to the stomach area
Doraiswamy NV et al, 1999, UK231 children presenting to an ED with suspected MFB ingestionDiagnosticChest radiographPresence or absence of MFB on scan. MFB localisation to chest or abdomen.Adams AD 18® model. Coins present in 146 patients. 8 false positives.
Seikel K et al, 1999, US176 consecutive children presenting to 2 children’s hospitals with suspected MFB ingestion examined by "inexperienced" scanners, 140 of whom were also seen by "experienced" scannersDiagnosticChest radiographPresence or absence of MFB on scan. MFB localisation to chest or abdomenGarrett Super-Scanner® model. Coins present in 60 patients. 6 false positives. MFBs were only missed in the inexperienced group
Tidey B et al, 1996, UK20 children presenting to an ED with suspected foreign body ingestionDiagnosticSerial radiographs (chest +/− abdomen +/− neck)Presence or absence of MFB on scan. MFB localisation to chest or abdomenAdams AD 15® model. Coins present in 8 patients.
Sachetti A et al, 1994, US23 children presenting to an ED with suspected MFB ingestionDiagnosticChest radiographPresence or absence of MFB on scan. MFB localisation to chest or abdomenGarrett Super-Scanner® and Enforcer G2® model. Coins present in 6 patients.
Biehler JL et al, 1993, US19 consecutive children presenting to an ED with suspected coin ingestion and 11 children referred with proven oesophageal coinDiagnosticSerial radiographs (chest +/− abdomen +/− neck +/− lateral chest)Presence or absence of coin on scan. Coin localisation to chest or abdomen.Backpacker-2 TR® model. Coins present in 27 patients. Areas used to document localisation were: above clavicles, substernal, or abdominal
Ros S et al, 1992, US14 consecutive children presenting to an ED with suspected coin ingestionDiagnosticChest and abdominal radiographs.Presence or absence of coin on scan. Coin localisation to chest or abdomenGarrett Super-Scanner® model. Coins present in 11 patients. 1 coin in the rectum not identified. Only the anterior neck, chest, and abdomen were scanned