Literature DB >> 32651729

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.

Johanna Waidhauser1,2, Benedikt Martin3, Martin Trepel4, Bruno Märkl3.   

Abstract

Ever declining autopsy rates have been a concern of pathologists as well as clinicians for decades. Notably, in the field of oncology, data on autopsies and discrepancies between clinical and autoptic diagnoses are particularly scarce. In this retrospective study, we show the effect of a simple catalog of measures consisting of a different approach to obtain consent for autopsy, structured conferencing, and systematic teaching of residents, as well as a close collaboration between clinicians and pathologists on the numbers of autopsies, especially of oncological patients. Additionally, postmortem examination protocols from the years 2015 until 2019 were analyzed, regarding rates of discrepancies between clinical and autoptic causes of death in this category of patients. Autopsy numbers could be significantly increased from a minimum in 2014 (60 autopsies) to a maximum in 2018 (142 autopsies) (p < 0.0001). In the 67 autopsies of oncological cases, a high rate of 51% of major discrepancy between clinical and autoptic causes of death could be detected. In contrast to the general reported decline of autopsy rates, we present rising autopsy numbers over the past 5 years with an increasing number of oncological cases who underwent a postmortem examination. The high percentage of major discrepancies between clinical and autopsy diagnosis is in contrast to an expected decrease of major discrepancies in times of precise diagnostic methods and underlines the importance of autopsies to ensure high quality in diagnostics and therapy not only in the field of oncology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Autopsy; Discrepancy; Oncology; Postmortem examination; Rate; Tumor

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32651729      PMCID: PMC7969536          DOI: 10.1007/s00428-020-02884-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Virchows Arch        ISSN: 0945-6317            Impact factor:   4.064


  20 in total

Review 1.  Clinical, educational, and epidemiological value of autopsy.

Authors:  Julian L Burton; James Underwood
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2007-04-28       Impact factor: 79.321

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

Authors:  Hyejong Song Marshall; Clara Milikowski
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 5.534

3.  The value of autopsies in the era of high-tech medicine: discrepant findings persist.

Authors:  Chantal C H J Kuijpers; Judith Fronczek; Frank R W van de Goot; Hans W M Niessen; Paul J van Diest; Mehdi Jiwa
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2014-03-04       Impact factor: 3.411

4.  [Autopsy rates in Germany].

Authors:  M Grassow-Narlik; M Wessolly; J Friemann
Journal:  Pathologe       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 1.011

5.  Learning from the Dead.

Authors:  Kevin M De Cock; Emily Zielinski-Gutiérrez; Sebastian B Lucas
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  The value of the autopsy in three medical eras.

Authors:  L Goldman; R Sayson; S Robbins; L H Cohn; M Bettmann; M Weisberg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1983-04-28       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Causes of deaths in an oncologic intensive care unit: a clinical and pathological study of 34 autopsies.

Authors:  J Gerain; J P Sculier; A Malengreaux; C Rykaert; L Thémelin
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 9.162

8.  The medical autopsy as quality assurance tool in clinical medicine: dreams and realities.

Authors:  Jan G van den Tweel; Christian Wittekind
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 4.064

9.  Cause of death and significant disease found at autopsy.

Authors:  Niklas Friberg; Oscar Ljungberg; Erik Berglund; David Berglund; Richard Ljungberg; Irina Alafuzoff; Elisabet Englund
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2019-11-05       Impact factor: 4.064

10.  Premortem clinical diagnoses and postmortem autopsy findings: discrepancies in critically ill cancer patients.

Authors:  Stephen M Pastores; Alina Dulu; Louis Voigt; Nina Raoof; Margarita Alicea; Neil A Halpern
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 9.097

View more
  3 in total

1.  Cause of Death in Patients in Radiation Oncology.

Authors:  Justus Domschikowski; Karoline Koch; Claudia Schmalz
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-10-21       Impact factor: 6.244

2.  The importance of autopsies despite the declining number amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Monika Bhatt; Mani MovaseghiGargari; Momal T Chand
Journal:  Autops Case Rep       Date:  2022-04-20

3.  Viral mapping in COVID-19 deceased in the Augsburg autopsy series of the first wave: A multiorgan and multimethodological approach.

Authors:  Klaus Hirschbühl; Sebastian Dintner; Martin Beer; Claudia Wylezich; Jürgen Schlegel; Claire Delbridge; Lukas Borcherding; Jirina Lippert; Stefan Schiele; Gernot Müller; Dimitra Moiraki; Oliver Spring; Michael Wittmann; Elisabeth Kling; Georg Braun; Thomas Kröncke; Rainer Claus; Bruno Märkl; Tina Schaller
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-07-19       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.