Literature DB >> 8476178

Surgical audit without autopsy: tales of the unexpected.

D A Mosquera1, M D Goldman.   

Abstract

To establish our current practice and the potential value of the autopsy in general surgery, a retrospective review of general surgical autopsies was performed at one district general hospital from January 1989 to August 1991. There was considerable interconsultant variation in autopsy practice with a low 25% overall autopsy rate reflecting a low autopsy request rate. There were discrepancies between the clinical and pathological cause of death in 40 (63%) cases. There were important discrepancies which may have changed management in life in 18 (28%) autopsies, 7 (39%) of which were untreated visceral perforations. Autopsy is an important part of the surgical audit and will disclose considerable unsuspected pathology. Present autopsy rates are low and need to be improved. The unexpected finding of seven untreated visceral perforations requires further study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8476178      PMCID: PMC2497765     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl        ISSN: 0035-8843            Impact factor:   1.891


  6 in total

1.  Is necropsy a valid monitor of clinical diagnosis performance?

Authors:  R Saracci
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-10-12

2.  Value of the necropsy in perioperative deaths.

Authors:  J H Shanks; G McCluggage; N H Anderson; P G Toner
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Autopsies should be performed on all cases.

Authors:  V Tchertkoff
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1989-04-21       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Autopsy as quality assurance in the intensive care unit.

Authors:  P Fernandez-Segoviano; A Lázaro; A Esteban; J M Rubio; J R Iruretagoyena
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 7.598

5.  The prospects of autopsy: mortui vivos docuerunt? ("Have the dead taught the living?").

Authors:  M Boers
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 4.965

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

  6 in total
  7 in total

Review 1.  Acp. Best practice no 155. Pathological investigation of deaths following surgery, anaesthesia, and medical procedures.

Authors:  R D Start; S S Cross
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 3.411

2.  Factors predicting cases with unexpected clinical findings at necropsy.

Authors:  I A Robinson; N J Marley
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Studies of avoidable factors influencing death: a call for explicit criteria.

Authors:  R Westerling
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1996-09

4.  Does the medical autopsy still have a place in the current diagnostic process? A 6-year retrospective study in two French University hospitals.

Authors:  Sarah Humez; Clémence Delteil; Claude Alain Maurage; Julia Torrents; Caroline Capuani; Lucile Tuchtan; Marie-Dominique Piercecchi
Journal:  Forensic Sci Med Pathol       Date:  2019-11-09       Impact factor: 2.007

5.  Public perceptions of necropsy.

Authors:  R D Start; C A Saul; D W Cotton; N J Mathers; J C Underwood
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  Evaluation of the discrepancy between clinical diagnostic hypotheses and anatomopathological diagnoses resulting from autopsies.

Authors:  Talita Zerbini; Julio M Singer; Vilma Leyton
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2019-09-16       Impact factor: 2.365

Review 7.  Clinical review: What is the role for autopsy in the ICU?

Authors:  Greet Yvonne Agnes De Vlieger; Elien Marie Jeanne Lia Mahieu; Wouter Meersseman
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 9.097

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.