Rectal foreign bodies. Diagnostic program and emergency care

AIM: to estimate clinical approaches to rectal foreign bodies (RFBs). PATIENTS AND METHODS: the retrospective cohort study included 47 patients (2022-2024) with suspected RFBs. Two clinical cases are presented. Case No. 1. Patient N., a 41-year-old male, was presented with RFB (a glass tumbler), introduced into the rectum without his consent. Because of RFB migration to the upper parts of the colon and risk of the intestinal perforation a laparotomy with removal of the intact foreign body was done. Case No. 2. Patient A, a 26-year-old male, was presented with RFB (a 80.0 × 7.0 cm dildo) that was transanally removed in the emergency room without anesthesia. No post-op complications developed. No any literature data of successful transanal removal of a larger RFB was found [1–5]. RESULTS: out of 47 patients, the manual transanal removal of RFBs was successful in 46 (97.9%) cases. One (2.1%) patient required laparotomy due to the high risk of rectal injury and retrograde migration of RFB to the proximal colon. A variety of RFBs (size, shape, and material), an individual, structured approach to the diagnosis and treatment is required. CONCLUSION: clinical approach to RFBs depends on risk of intestinal perforation.