Ethics

Repeat endoscopy for deliberate foreign body ingestions


 

A 35-year-old female with a complex psychiatric history and polysubstance use presents to the emergency department following ingestion of three sewing needles. The patient has a long history of multiple suicide attempts and foreign-body ingestions requiring repeated endoscopy. Prior ingestions include, but are not limited to, razor blades, screws, toothbrushes, batteries, plastic cutlery, and shower curtain rings. The patient has had over 50 upper endoscopies within the past year in addition to a laryngoscopy and bronchoscopy for retrieval of foreign bodies. Despite intensive inpatient psychiatric treatment and outpatient behavioral therapy, the patient continues to present with recurrent ingestions, creating frustration among multiple health care providers. Are gastroenterologists obligated to perform repeated endoscopies for recurrent foreign-body ingestions? Is there a point at which it would be medically and ethically appropriate to defer endoscopy in this clinical scenario?

Deliberate foreign-body ingestion (DFBI) is a psychological disorder in which patients swallow nonnutritive objects. The disorder is commonly seen in young female patients with psychiatric disorders.1 It is also associated with substance abuse, intellectual disabilities, and malingering (such as external motivation to avoid jail). Of those with psychiatric disorders, repeat ingestions are primarily seen in patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD) or part of a syndrome of self-mutilation or attention-seeking behavior.2 Patients with BPD are thought to have atrophic changes in the brain causing neurocognitive dysfunction accounting for such behaviors.1 Self-injurious behavior is also associated with a history of abandonment and childhood abuse.3 Studies show that 85% of patients evaluated for DFBI have a prior psychiatric diagnosis and 84% of these patients have a history of prior ingestions.4

Dr. Ariel Sims, University of Chicago

Dr. Ariel Sims

Unfortunately, clinicians have a poor understanding of the psychopathology driving this behavior and treatment options are limited. Standard pharmacologic agents such as antipsychotics and mood stabilizers have demonstrated low efficacy. Similarly, cognitive-behavioral therapies provide little benefit.3 The refractory nature of this disease to current therapies causes the treatment to be focused around endoscopic and surgical removal. The vast majority of DFBI cases do not appear in the psychiatric literature, and instead are found in the gastroenterological and surgical literature.3 Although endoscopy is a low-risk procedure, we should thoughtfully consider the utility of repeated procedures in this patient population.

In this case, the patient’s needles were successfully removed endoscopically. The psychiatry service adjusted her medication regimen and conducted a prolonged behavioral therapy session focused on coping strategies and impulse control. The following morning, the patient managed to overpower her 24-hour 1:1 sitter to ingest a pen. Endoscopy was performed again, with successful removal of the pen.

Pages

Next Article: