ArticleLung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society2026
Diagnostic performance of minimally invasive autopsy in a respiratory ICU: A retrospective analysis.
Article in Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPost-mortem tissue sampling can help determine the cause of death, particularly in resource-limited settings. We conducted a retrospective audit of minimally invasive autopsies (MIA) performed in a respiratory intensive care unit.
methodsLung biopsies were obtained using either a core biopsy needle (CBN) or through a small thoracic incision at the fourth intercostal space (open incision method [OIM]). We performed a kidney or liver biopsy using a CBN with ultrasound guidance. The final cause of death, ascertained by a multidisciplinary team, served as the reference standard. The primary objective was to assess biopsy yield and the frequency of diagnostic revision based on histopathological findings.
resultsOne hundred and sixteen patients underwent MIA. Lung biopsies were done in all cases (66 [56.9%] by CBN and 50 [43.1%] by OIM). Kidney and liver were biopsied in less than 10% of cases. Twelve biopsies (10.3%) were non-representative and excluded from further analysis. The overall biopsy yield was 74%. Pathological findings led to a change in the final diagnosis in three cases (2.9%). Infections aetiologies were most common, including bacterial pneumonia (24, [23.1%]), fungal pneumonia (8, [7.7%]), and tuberculosis (2, [1.9%]). Malignancy was identified in 8 (7.7%) cases. The diagnostic yield was significantly higher with OIM than with CBN (87.5% vs. 62.5%, P = 0.004). Agreement between clinical and pathological diagnoses was fair (kappa = 0.41, P < 0.001).
conclusionMIA achieved a 74% diagnostic yield with fair agreement with the MDT-determined cause of death. OIM provided a superior yield compared to CBN and may be preferable where feasible.
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.