Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31489387›Full record

ReviewForensic sciences research2019

Postmortem imaging as a complementary tool for the investigation of cardiac death.

Katarzyna Michaud, Pia Genet, Sara Sabatasso, Silke Grabherr

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Forensic sciences research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Postmortem CT: Applications in Clinical and Forensic Medicine.Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc · 2025
    Review
  5. The current state of forensic imaging - post mortem imaging.International journal of legal medicine · 2025
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Diagnostic value of TForensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. State of the Art on the Role ofTomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Katarzyna MichaudLausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, University Center of Legal Medicine Lausanne-Geneva, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-2681-2544
Pia GenetLausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, University Center of Legal Medicine Lausanne-Geneva, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Sara SabatassoGeneva University Hospital, University Center of Legal Medicine Lausanne-Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Silke GrabherrLausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, University Center of Legal Medicine Lausanne-Geneva, Lausanne, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-9914-2310
University Centre of Legal Medicine · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the past 2 decades, modern radiological methods, such as multiple detector computed tomography (MDCT), MDCT-angiography, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were introduced into postmortem practice for investigation of sudden death (SD), including cases of sudden cardiac death (SCD). In forensic cases, the underlying cause of SD is most frequently cardiovascular with coronary atherosclerotic disease as the leading cause. There are many controversies about the role of postmortem imaging in establishing the cause of death and especially the value of minimally invasive autopsy techniques. This paper discusses the state of the art for postmortem radiological evaluation of the heart compared to classical postmortem examination, especially in cases of SCD. In SCD cases, postmortem CT is helpful to estimate the heart size and to visualize haemopericardium and calcified plaques and valves, as well as to identify and locate cardiovascular devices. Angiographic methods are useful to provide a detailed view of the coronary arteries and to analyse them, especially regarding the extent and location of stenosis and obstruction. In postsurgical cases, it allows verification and documentation of the patency of stents and bypass grafts before opening the body. Postmortem MRI is used to investigate soft tissues such as the myocardium, but images are susceptible to postmortem changes and further work is necessary to increase the understanding of these radiological aspects, especially of the ischemic myocardium. In postsurgery cases, the value of postmortem imaging of the heart is reportedly for the diagnostic and documentation purposes. The implementation of new imaging methods into routine postmortem practice is challenging, as it requires not only an investment in equipment but, more importantly, investment in the expertise of interpreting the images. Once those requirements are implemented, however, they bring great advantages in investigating cases of SCD, as they allow documentation of the body, orientation of sampling for further analyses and gathering of other information that cannot be obtained by conventional autopsy such as a complete visualization of the vascular system using postmortem angiography.Key pointsThere are no established guidelines for the interpretation of postmortem imaging examination of the heartAt present, postmortem imaging methods are considered as less accurate than the autopsy for cardiac deathsPostmortem imaging is useful as a complementary tool for cardiac deathsThere is still a need to validate postmortem imaging in cardiac deaths by comparing with autopsy findings.

Indexed as

autopsyforensic pathologyForensic sciencesminimally invasive autopsypostmortem CT-angiographypostmortem imagingsudden cardiac death

Identifiers

PMID31489387
PMCPMC6713140
OpenAlexW2969627844

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.