Literature DB >> 28657772

Comparison of Clinical Diagnoses and Autopsy Findings: Six-Year Retrospective Study.

Hyejong Song Marshall, Clara Milikowski.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: - The frequency of autopsies has declined in most developed countries beginning in the latter half of the 20th century. During this time period the technology of medicine made significant advances; however, it is important to regularly reevaluate the role of the autopsy to confirm suspected diagnoses and identify unsuspected findings.
OBJECTIVE: - To determine what portion of autopsies reveal clinically meaningful unexpected findings.
DESIGN: - Reports that included clinical histories of autopsies performed at Jackson Memorial Hospital during the 6 years between 2009 and 2014 were reviewed by 2 pathologists. Each case was classified using the Goldman Classification.
RESULTS: - In the given time period, 923 autopsies were performed; 512 patients (55.5%) were adults. A total of 334 cases were subject to review after excluding those with a short (<1 day) hospital stay, restriction to a single organ or body cavity, and cases referred from other facilities. A total of 33 of 334 cases (9.9%) were identified as class I discrepancy, where the autopsy revealed a discrepant diagnosis with a potential impact on survival or treatment. Critical findings, such as untreated infection (15 of 33 cases; 45.5%), pulmonary embolism (8 of 33 cases; 24.2%), and undiagnosed malignancy (6 of 33 cases; 18.2%), were found in these cases. Major significant findings that had not been clinically detected, whether clinically manageable or not (class I and II), were found in 65 of 334 cases (19.5%).
CONCLUSION: - Despite intensive modern clinical investigations, autopsies continue to reveal major antemortem diagnostic errors in a significant number of cases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28657772     DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2016-0488-OA

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med        ISSN: 0003-9985            Impact factor:   5.534


  10 in total

Review 1.  Post-Mortem Examination as a Quality Improvement Instrument.

Authors:  Christian Wittekind; Tanja Gradistanac
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2018-09-28       Impact factor: 5.594

2.  Autopsy Standardized Mortality Review: A Pilot Study Offering a Methodology for Improved Patient Outcomes.

Authors:  C A Early; M G F Gilliland; K L Kelly; W R Oliver; P J Kragel
Journal:  Acad Pathol       Date:  2019-02-12

3.  Blood alcohol levels in Finnish victims of non-ischaemic sudden cardiac death.

Authors:  Janna P Kauppila; Lasse Pakanen; Katja Porvari; Juha Vähätalo; Lauri Holmström; Juha S Perkiömäki; Heikki V Huikuri; M Juhani Junttila
Journal:  Ann Med       Date:  2021-12       Impact factor: 4.709

4.  Determining Cause of Death During Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.

Authors:  Khaled M Nada; En-Shuo Hsu; Justin Seashore; Mohammed Zaidan; Shawn P Nishi; Alexander Duarte; Gulshan Sharma
Journal:  Crit Care Explor       Date:  2021-04-26

Review 5.  Maternal death analysis based on data from the nationwide registration system in Japan (2010-2018).

Authors:  Tomoko Wakasa; Hatsue Ishibashi-Ueda; Makoto Takeuchi
Journal:  Pathol Int       Date:  2021-02-09       Impact factor: 2.534

6.  Clinico-pathological discrepancies in the diagnosis of causes of death in adults in Mozambique: A retrospective observational study.

Authors:  Jaume Ordi; Paola Castillo; Alberto L Garcia-Basteiro; Cinta Moraleda; Fabiola Fernandes; Llorenç Quintó; Juan Carlos Hurtado; Emili Letang; Lucilia Lovane; Dercio Jordao; Mireia Navarro; Rosa Bene; Tacilta Nhampossa; Mamudo R Ismail; Cesaltina Lorenzoni; Assucena Guisseve; Natalia Rakislova; Rosauro Varo; Lorena Marimon; Ariadna Sanz; Anelsio Cossa; Inacio Mandomando; Maria Maixenchs; Khátia Munguambe; Jordi Vila; Eusebio Macete; Pedro L Alonso; Quique Bassat; Miguel J Martínez; Carla Carrilho; Clara Menéndez
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-09-06       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Age-sex specific pulmonary embolism-related mortality in the USA and Canada, 2000-18: an analysis of the WHO Mortality Database and of the CDC Multiple Cause of Death database.

Authors:  Stefano Barco; Luca Valerio; Walter Ageno; Alexander T Cohen; Samuel Z Goldhaber; Beverley J Hunt; Alfonso Iorio; David Jimenez; Frederikus A Klok; Nils Kucher; Seyed Hamidreza Mahmoudpour; Saskia Middeldorp; Thomas Münzel; Vicky Tagalakis; Aaron M Wendelboe; Stavros V Konstantinides
Journal:  Lancet Respir Med       Date:  2020-10-12       Impact factor: 30.700

8.  Can low autopsy rates be increased? Yes, we can! Should postmortem examinations in oncology be performed? Yes, we should! A postmortem analysis of oncological cases.

Authors:  Johanna Waidhauser; Benedikt Martin; Martin Trepel; Bruno Märkl
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2020-07-10       Impact factor: 4.064

9.  Comparison of antemortem clinical diagnosis and post-mortem findings in intensive care unit patients.

Authors:  Stefan Rusu; Philomène Lavis; Vilma Domingues Salgado; Marie-Paule Van Craynest; Jacques Creteur; Isabelle Salmon; Alexandre Brasseur; Myriam Remmelink
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2021-02-13       Impact factor: 4.064

10.  Discrepancies between clinical and autopsy findings in patients who had an acute stroke.

Authors:  Lilla Hudák; Attila Csaba Nagy; Sarolta Molnár; Gábor Méhes; Katalin Erzsébet Nagy; László Oláh; László Csiba
Journal:  Stroke Vasc Neurol       Date:  2022-01-31
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.