Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Running a postmortem service — a business case and clinical experience

  • Minisymposium
  • Published:
Pediatric Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of the postmortem examination is to offer answers to explain the cause and manner of death. In the case of perinatal, infant and paediatric postmortem examinations, the goal is to identify unsuspected associated features, to describe pathogenic mechanisms and new conditions, and to evaluate the clinical management and diagnosis. Additionally, the postmortem examination is useful to counsel families regarding the probability of recurrence in future pregnancies and to inform family planning. Worldwide the rate of paediatric autopsy examinations has significantly declined during the last few decades. Religious objections to postmortem dissection and organ retention scandals in the United Kingdom provided some of the impetus for a search for non-invasive alternatives to the traditional autopsy; however, until recently, imaging studies remained an adjunct to, rather than a replacement for, the traditional autopsy. In 2012, Sheffield Children’s Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust set up the service provision of minimally invasive fetal, perinatal and neonatal autopsy, while a postmortem imaging service has been running in Melbourne, Australia, since 2008. Here we summarise the essentials of a business case and practical British and Australian experiences in terms of the pathological and radiologic aspects of setting up a minimally invasive clinical service in the United Kingdom and of developing a clinical postmortem imaging service as a complementary tool to the traditional autopsy in Australia.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Laing IA (2004) Clinical aspects of neonatal death and autopsy. Sem Neonatol 9:247–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Landefeld CS, Chren MM, Myers A et al (1998) Diagnostic yield of the autopsy in a university hospital and a community hospital. N Engl J Med 318:1249–1254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Swinton CH, Weiner J, Okah FA (2013) The neonatal autopsy: can it be revived? Am J Perinatol 30:739–744

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dahms B (1986) The autopsy in pediatrics. Am J Dis Child 140:335

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Brodie M, Laing IA, Keeling JW et al (2002) Ten years of neonatal autopsies in tertiary referral centre: retrospective study. Br Med J 324:761–763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Cohen M, Drut R (2003) The pediatric autopsy. The situation in a pediatric hospital in Argentina. Arch Arg Ped 101:166–170

    Google Scholar 

  7. Weston MJ, Porter HJ, Andrews HS et al (1993) Correlation of antenatal ultrasonography and pathological examination in 153 malformed fetuses. J Clin Ultrasound 21:387–392

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cartlidge PHT, Dawson AT, Stewart JH et al (1995) Value and quality of perinatal and infant postmortem examinations: cohort analysis of 400 consecutive deaths. Br Med J 310:155–158

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Parker A (2004) Less invasive autopsy: the place of magnetic resonance imaging. Department of Health, London. http://publications.doh.gov.uk/cmo/program/ organretention/mri_report.pdf

  10. Burton JL, Underwood JCE (2003) Necropsy practice after the ‘organ retention scandal’: requests, performance, and tissue retention. J Clin Pathol 56:537–541

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Burton JL, Wells M (2001) The Alder Hey affair: implications for pathology practice. J Clin Pathol 54:820–823

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sullivan J, Monagle P (2011) Bereaved parents’ perceptions of the autopsy examination of their child. Pediatrics 127:e1012–e1020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bisset R (1998) Magnetic resonance imaging may be alternative to necropsy. Br Med J 317:1450

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Brookes JS, Hall-Craggs MA (1997) Postmortem perinatal examination: the role of magnetic resonance imaging. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 9:145–147

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Whitby EH, Paley MN, Cohen M et al (2005) Postmortem MR imaging of the fetus: an adjunct or a replacement for conventional autopsy? Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 10:475–483

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Olsen ØE, Espeland A, Maartmann-Moe H et al (2003) Diagnostic value of radiography in cases of perinatal death: a population based study. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 88:F521–524

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Roberts IS, Benamore RE, Benbow EW et al (2012) Post-mortem imaging as an alternative to autopsy in the diagnosis of adult deaths: a validation study. Lancet 379:136–142

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Roberts ISD, Cohen MC, Benbow EW (2007) The non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy. In: Underwood J (ed) Recent advances in histopathology: 22. The Royal Society of Medicine Press, London, pp 181–193

    Google Scholar 

  19. Widjaja E, Whitby EH, Cohen M et al (2006) Post-mortem MRI of the foetal spine and spinal cord. Clin Radiol 61:679–685

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cohen M, Whitby E (2007) The use of magnetic resonance in the hospital and coronial pediatric postmortem examination. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 3:289–296

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cohen M, Paley M, Griffiths P et al (2008) Less invasive autopsy: benefits and limitations of the use of magnetic resonance imaging in the perinatal postmortem. Ped Develop Pathol 11:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Thayyil S, Chandrasekaran M, Elbourne D et al (2010) Diagnostic accuracy, cost-benefit and acceptability of less invasive autopsy by post-mortem magnetic resonance imaging: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Radiol 75:E142–E148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Cannie M, Votino C, Moerman P et al (2012) Acceptance, reliability and confidence of diagnosis of fetal and neonatal virtuopsy compared with conventional autopsy: a prospective study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 39:659–665

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Ben-Sasi K, Chitty LS, Franck LS et al (2013) Acceptability of a minimally invasive perinatal/pediatric autopsy: healthcare professionals’ views and implications for practice. Prenat Diagn 33:301–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Royal College of Radiologists (2012) Writing a good business case. http://www.rcr.ac.uk/docs/radiology/pdf/BFCR(12)_business.pdf. Accessed 7 Aug 2014

  26. Thayyil S, Sebire NJ, Chitty LS et al (2013) Post-mortem MRI versus conventional autopsy in foetuses and children: a prospective validation study. Lancet 382:223–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Royal College of Pathologists Working Party on the Autopsy (2006) Guidelines on autopsy practice. Scenario 9: stillborn infant (singleton). http://www.rcpath.org/Resources/RCPath/Migrated%20Resources/Documents/G/G001Autopsy-Stillbirths-Jun06.pdf. Accessed 4 July 2014

  28. Breeze AC, Jessop FA, Set PA et al (2011) Minimally invasive fetal autopsy using magnetic resonance imaging and percutaneous organ biopsies: clinical value and comparison to conventional autopsy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 37:317–323

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Sebire NJ, Weber MA, Thayyil S et al (2012) Minimally invasive perinatal autopsies using magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopic post-mortem examination (‘keyhole autopsy’). J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 25:513–518

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amaka C. Offiah.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cohen, M.C., Whitby, E., Fink, M.A. et al. Running a postmortem service — a business case and clinical experience. Pediatr Radiol 45, 501–508 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-3156-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-3156-0

Keywords

Navigation