Missed foreign bodies in the hand: an experience from a center in Kashmir

Figures & data

Figure 1.  Nature of retained foreign bodies.

Figure 2.  Age distribution (in years).

Table 1. Occupational status of the patients

Occupation of patients	Number (n) and percentage
Laborers	36 (59.02%)
Students	9 (14.75%)
Housewives	5 (8.20%)
Office employees	4 (6.56%)
Artisans/Sculptors	7 (11.47%)

Table 2. Presenting features of missed foreign bodies

Presenting feature of missed foreign bodies	Number (n) and percentage
Non-healing/Discharging wound	33 (54.1%)
Chronic pain	21 (34.4%)
Visible lump/Foreign body sensation	5 (8.2%)
Spontaneous hematoma	1 (1.6%)
Median nerve deficit (paresthesias)	1 (1.6%)

Table 3. Time elapsed since possible penetration of foreign body

Time since injury and possible penetration of foreign bodies	Number (n) and percentage
Up to two weeks	6 (9.84%)
Two weeks to two months	9 (14.75%)
Two to six months	2 (3.28%)
Six months to two years	6 (9.84%)
Above two years	1 (1.64%)
Unknown	37 (60.65%)

Figure 3.  Management of injuries resulting in missed foreign bodies.

Figure 4.  (A) Plain radiograph showing a retained glass piece (arrow). (B) Plain radiograph showing a retained sewing needle. (C) Plain radiograph showing a radio-opaque pellet along proximal phalanx of index finger (arrow). (D) Ultrasonogram revealing echogenic wooden splinters (arrow).

Table 4. Diagnostic modalities used for localizing missed foreign bodies

Nature of foreign bodies	Number (n)	Diagnosis by plain radiographs	Diagnosis by ultra sonograms
Wooden splinters	37	2 (3.3%)	35 (96.7%)
Glass pieces	7	6 (85.7%)	1 (14.3%)
Metallic fragments	13	12 (92.30%)	1 (7.70%)
Stone fragment	4	4 (100%)	–