Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
EDITOR Postmortem radiology is a useful tool to confirm the presence of
diseases, but it should not be used to replace the gold standard examination, a necropsy.3 Bisset et al in their paper
often do not confirm their diagnoses through this gold standard;
diagnoses where they are used show a difference of importance placed by the pathologist as to the cause of death. It should also be noted that
most diagnoses provided by imaging are in fact "modes of death" and
as such, if left unqualified by an underlying causation, are
unacceptable on a death certificate.4 This error may
result in referral of the case by the registrar general to the coroner for further investigation, which may cause further upset for the next
of kin.2
The difficulty in interpretation of images obtained by magnetic
resonance scanning is well recognised in pathology, with anecdotal evidence of diagnostic inaccuracies discovered when examining subsequent surgical specimens or at necropsy. Postmortem artefacts, recognisable to the pathologist, also remain to be thoroughly documented radiologically.
The political problems also require addressing should it become
apparent that cadavers are undergoing imaging when waiting lists
continue to increase. Even though the work is performed out of hours,
or in private facilities, it may result in embarrassment for local
health authorities.
The necropsy in itself is comparatively inexpensive and may
provide accurate information based on histology, microbiology, and
toxicology
Recent high profile events surrounding postmortem examination
procedures have required that additional means of examination be
sought.1 A necropsy describes a variety of methods used to
ascertain the cause of death or pathological conditions within a
deceased person, and ranges from a needle biopsy to radiology. Common
usage of the term, however, refers to the thorough macroscopic and
microscopic examinations of the organ systems, which are evidence based
and derived from the centuries of research into pathological processes
and their correlation with premorbid conditions. Information from the
necropsy aids examiners to complete a medical certificate of cause of
death to the best of their knowledge and belief, as instructed by
law.2
tests that are beyond the reach of magnetic resonance imaging. Histological and microbiological results are essential for the
creation of health statistics that form the basis of future healthcare
provision. Would postmortem radiology alone allow identification of the
type of tumour or the infectious causation? As such, surely doctors are
failing to identify the cause of death "to the best of their
knowledge and belief."4
Department of Histopathology, Level 3, Sandringham Building,
Leicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester LE1 5WW bs7{at}le.ac.uk
| 1. |
Bisset RAL, Thomas NB, Turnball IW, Lee S.
Postmortem examinations using magnetic resonance imaging: four year review of a working service.
BMJ
2002;
324:
1423-1424 |
| 2. |
Swift B, West K.
Death certification: an audit of practice entering the 21st century.
J Clin Pathol
2002;
55:
275-279 |
| 3. | Huisman TA, Wisser J, Stallmach T, Krestin GP, Huch R, Kubik-Huch RA. MR autopsy in fetuses. Fetal Diagn Ther 2002; 17: 58-64[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 4. | Registrar General. Medical certificate of cause of death (form 66): notes for doctors. London: Office for National Statistics. |
Read all Rapid Responses
What can you learn from this BMJ paper? Read Leanne Tite's Paper+