ArticleInternational journal of legal medicine2026
Diagnostic tips for multi-phase post-mortem computed tomography angiography interpretation in upper gastro-intestinal bleeding.
Article in International journal of legal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mapping two decades of forensic virtopsy: a comprehensive bibliometric analysis (2006-2025).International journal of legal medicine · 2026Review
- Histological artifacts induced by the contrast agent in multi-phase post-mortem CT angiography (MPMCTA): Part II - Pathological tissues.Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the past 10 years, the Multi-phase Post-mortem Computed Tomography Angiography (MPMCTA) has considerably improved the quality and precision of postmortem diagnoses, particularly in cases with vascular implication. MPMCTA is known to have higher sensitivity for detecting the source of a hemorrhage than autopsy. Death by upper gastro-intestinal (GI) bleeding is not so uncommon in forensic practice. MPMCTA, like any other diagnostic test, can produce artifacts that must be recognized. Radiologists at our center have previously encountered images suggestive of upper GI bleeding that were ultimately identified as artifacts during autopsy. This is why we believe it is essential to establish criteria to differentiate true bleeding from artifacts. The aim of our study was to compare the diagnostic value of MPMCTA and autopsy in detecting and localizing sources of upper GI bleeding, and to establish diagnostic criteria to aid in the interpretation of upper GI contrast extravasation on angiography. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study, analyzing MPMCTA and autopsy data from 326 human bodies. In the GI tract, contrast extravasation should not be immediately interpreted as a sign of active bleeding. In cases of true GI hemorrhage, MPMCTA reveals specific features suggestive of bleeding, such as hyperdense material within the GI tract on native CT, and a focal contrast leakage during the arterial or venous phase. This article offers tips that may help radiologists and forensic pathologists distinguish true bleeding from artifacts when interpreting MPMCTA findings in the upper GI tract.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.