Advertisement

Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 170–176 | Cite as

Differentiation of hemopericardium due to ruptured myocardial infarction or aortic dissection on unenhanced postmortem computed tomography

  • Garyfalia AmpanoziEmail author
  • Patricia M. Flach
  • Thomas D. Ruder
  • Laura Filograna
  • Wolf Schweitzer
  • Michael J. Thali
  • Lars C. Ebert
Original Article
First Online:

Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate unenhanced postmortem computed tomography (PMCT) in cases of non-traumatic hemopericardium by establishing the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of diagnostic criteria for the differentiation between aortic dissection and myocardial wall rupture due to infarction. Twenty six cases were identified as suitable for evaluation, of which ruptured aortic dissection could be identified as the underlying cause of hemopericardium in 50% of the cases, and myocardial wall rupture also in 50% of the cases. All cases underwent a PMCT and 24 of the cases also underwent one or more additional examinations: a subsequent autopsy, or a postmortem magnetic resonance (PMMR), or a PMCT angiography (PMCTA), or combinations of the above. Two radiologists evaluated the PMCT images and classified each case as “aortic dissection”, “myocardial wall rupture” or “undetermined”. Quantification of the pericardial blood was carried out using segmentation techniques. 17 of 26 cases were correctly identified, either as aortic dissections or myocardial ruptures, by both readers. 7 of 13 myocardial wall ruptures were identified by both readers, whereas both readers identified correctly 10 of 13 aortic dissection cases. Taking into account the responses of both readers, specificity was 100% for both causes of hemopericardium and sensitivity as well as accuracy was higher for aortic dissections than myocardial wall ruptures (72.7% and 87.5% vs 53.8% and 75% respectively). Pericardial blood volumes were constantly higher in the aortic dissection group, but a statistical significance of these differences could not be proven, since the small count of cases did not allow for statistical tests. This study showed that diagnostic criteria for the differentiation between ruptured aortic dissection and myocardial wall rupture due to infarction are highly specific and accurate.

Keywords

Virtopsy Forensic radiology Hemopericardium Postmortem computed tomography (PMCT) Aortic dissection Myocardial infarction 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors express their gratitude to Emma Louise Kessler, MD for her generous donation to the Zurich Institute of Forensic Medicine, University of Zurich, Switzerland.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was obtained by the Cantonal Ethics Committee of Zurich, Nr. 90–2015.

References

  1. 1.
    Baglivo M, Winklhofer S, Hatch GM, Ampanozi G, Thali MJ, Ruder TD. The rise of forensic and post-mortem radiology—analysis of the literature between the year 2000 and 2011. J Forens Radiol Imag. 2013;1:3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    O’Donnell C. An image of sudden death: utility of routine post-mortem computed tomography scanning in medico-legal autopsy practice. Diagn Histopathol. 2010;16:552–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burton EC, Mossa-Basha M. To image or to autopsy? Ann Intern Med. 2012;156:158–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Martinez RM, Ptacek W, Schweitzer W, Kronreif G, Fürst M, Thali MJ, Ebert LC. CT-guided, minimally invasive, postmortem needle biopsy using the B-Rob II needle-positioning robot. J Forensic Sci. 2014;59(2):517–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ebert LC, Ptacek W, Breitbeck R, Fürst M, Kronreif G, Martinez RM, et al. Virtobot 2.0: the future of automated surface documentation and CT-guided needle placement in forensic medicine. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2014;10(2):179–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blokker BM, Wagensveld IM, Weustink AC, Oosterhuis JW, Hunink MG. Non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy compared to conventional autopsy of suspected natural deaths in adults: a systematic review. Eur Radiol. 2016;26(4):1159–79.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schweitzer W, Flach PM, Thali M, Laberke P, Gascho D. Very economical immersion pump feasibility for postmortem CT angiography. J Forens Radiol Imag. 2016;5:8–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Restrepo CS, Lemos DF, Lemos JA, Velasquez E, Diethelm L, Ovella TA, et al. Imaging findings in cardiac tamponade with emphasis on CT. Radiographics. 2007;27(6):1595–610.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ruder TD, Ross S, Preiss U, Thali MJ. Minimally invasive post-mortem CT-angiography in a case involving a gunshot wound. Leg Med (Tokyo). 2010;12(3):154–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Holmes Jr DR, Nishimura R, Fountain R, Turi ZG. Iatrogenic pericardial effusion and tamponade in the percutaneous intracardiac intervention era. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2(8):705–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ebert LC, Schön CA, Ruder TD, Thali MJ, Hatch GM. Fatal left ventricular rupture and pericardial tamponade following a horse kick to the chest. Am J Forensic Med Pathol. 2012;33(2):167–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shirodaria CC, Becher H. Traumatic pericardial effusion caused by a safety pin. Heart. 2005;91:165.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yamaguchi R, Makino Y, Chiba F, Torimitsu S, Yajima D, Shinozaki T, et al. Fluid-fluid level and pericardial hyperdense ring appearance findings on unenhanced postmortem CT can differentiate between postmortem and antemortem pericardial hemorrhage. AJR. 2015;205:W568–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Watanabe S, Hyodoh H, Shimizu J, Okazaki S, Mizuo K, Rokukawa M. Classification of hemopericardium on postmortem CT. Leg Med (Tokyo). 2015;17(5):376–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Filograna L, Laberke P, Ampanozi G, Schweitzer W, Thali MJ, Bonomo L. Role of post-mortem computed tomography (PMCT) in the assessment of the challenging diagnosis of pericardial tamponade as cause of death in cases with hemopericardium. Radiol Med. 2015;120(8):723–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Byass P. Who needs cause-of-death data? PLoS Med. 2007;4(11):e333.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ripperger T, Tröger HD, Schmidtke J. The genetic message of a sudden, unexpected death due to thoracic aortic dissection. Forensic Sci Int. 2009;187:1–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ampanozi G, Flach PM, Fornaro J, Ross SG, Schweitzer W, Thali MJ, et al. Systematic analysis of the radiologic findings of aortic dissections on unenhanced postmortem computed tomography. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2015;11(2):162–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Weustink AC, Hunink MG, van Dijke CF, Renken NS, Krestin GP, Oosterhuis JW. Minimally invasive autopsy: an alternative to conventional autopsy? Radiology. 2009;250(3):897–904.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Roberts ISD, Benamore RE, Benbow EW, Lee SH, Harris JN, Jackson A, et al. Post-mortem imaging as an alternative to autopsy in the diagnosis of adult deaths: a validation study. Lancet. 2012;379:136–42.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Levy AD, Harcke HT, Mallak CT. Postmortem imaging: MDCT features of postmortem change and decomposition. Am J Forensic Med Pathol. 2010;31(1):12–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Flach PM, Gascho D, Schweitzer W, Ruder TD, Berger N, Ross SG, et al. Imaging in forensic radiology: an illustrated guide for postmortem computed tomography technique and protocols. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2014;10(4):583–606.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Flach PM, Gascho D, Ruder TD, Franckenberg S, Ross SG, Ebner L, et al. Postmortem and forensic magnetic resonance imaging. In: Saba L, editor. Magnetic resonance imaging handbook. Imaging of the pelvis, musculoskeletal system, and special applications to CAD. Vol. 3. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2016. pp. 455–82.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ebert LC, Ampanozi G, Ruder TD, Hatch G, Thali MJ, Germerott T. CT based volume measurement and estimation in cases of pericardial effusion. J Forensic Legal Med. 2012;19(3):126–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kuroiwa Y, Yamashita A, Nishihira K, Shibata Y, Matsuura Y, Maeda M, et al. Cardiac rupture in acute myocardial infarction: post-mortem MR imaging. Magn Reson Med Sci. 2011;10(4):255–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Okuda T, Shiotani S, Kobayashi T, Kohno M, Hayakawa H, Kikuchi K, et al. Immediate non-traumatic postmortem computed tomographic demonstration of myocardial intravascular gas of the left ventricle: effects from cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Spring. 2013;2(1):86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Garyfalia Ampanozi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Patricia M. Flach
    • 1
  • Thomas D. Ruder
    • 1
    • 2
  • Laura Filograna
    • 3
    • 4
  • Wolf Schweitzer
    • 1
  • Michael J. Thali
    • 1
  • Lars C. Ebert
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Forensic Medicine, Department of Forensic Medicine and ImagingUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Institute of Diagnostic, Interventional, and Pediatric RadiologyUniversity Hospital Bern, University of BernBernSwitzerland
  3. 3.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Molecular Imaging and Radiotherapy, PTV Foundation“Tor Vergata” University of RomeRomeItaly
  4. 4.Department of Radiological Sciences, PhD training program in Oncological Sciences, Catholic University of Rome, School of MedicineUniversity Hospital “A. Gemelli”RomeItaly

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options