Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Post-mortem magnetic resonance foetal imaging: a study of morphological correlation with conventional autopsy and histopathological findings

  • ETHICS AND FORENSIC RADIOLOGY
  • Published:
La radiologia medica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of the present study is to offer our experience concerning post-mortem magnetic resonance (PMMR) in foetal death cases and an evaluation of the differences between the findings acquired by PMMR and by forensic autopsy. Fifteen foetuses were recruited from July 2014 to December 2015. These had suffered intrauterine death in women in the 21st to 38th week of gestation who were treated in the emergency department for non-perception of foetal movements. We performed a PMMR on foetuses, 3 ± 1 days on average from the time of death, and then a complete forensic autopsy was performed. All 15 foetuses were examined with a whole-body study protocol, starting from the skull, down to and including the lower limbs. The total time of examination ranged from 20 to 30 min in each case. The external evaluation and description of post-mortem phenomena (maceration), record of the weight and detection and the various measurements of foetal diameters were evaluated before performing autopsy. A complete histopathological study was performed in each case. Out of 15 cases examined, eight were negative for structural anatomical abnormalities and/or diseases, both in the preliminary radiological examination and the traditional autopsy. In the remaining seven cases, pathological findings were detected by PMMR with corresponding results at autopsy. PMMR can provide useful information on foetal medical conditions and result in improved diagnostic classification. It may enable the planning of a more suitable technique before proceeding to autopsy, including focusing on certain aspects of organ pathology otherwise not detectable. The association between PMMR, post-mortem examination and related histological study of the foetus–placenta unit could help reduce the percentage of cases in which the cause of foetal death remains unexplained. Lastly, it may allow a selective sampling of the organ in order to target histological investigations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Thali MJ, Dirnhofer R, Beckerc R, Oliverc W, Potter K (2004) Is ‘virtual histology’ the next step after the ‘virtual autopsy’? Magnetic resonance microscopy in forensic medicine. Magn Reson Imaging 22:1131–1138

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Yen K, Lövblad KO, Scheurer E, Ozdoba C, Thali MJ, Aghayev E, Jackowski C, Anon J, Frickey N, Zwygart K, Weis J, Dirnhofer R (2007) Post-mortem forensic neuroimaging: correlation of MSCT and MRI findings with autopsy results. Forensic Sci Int 173:21–35

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Guddat SS, Gapert R, Tsokos M, Oesterhelweg L (2013) Proof of live birth using postmortem multislice computed tomography (pmMSCT) in cases of suspected neonaticide: advantages of diagnostic imaging compared to conventional autopsy. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 9:3–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Pomara C, Fineschi V, Scalzo G, Guglielmi G (2009) Virtopsy versus digital autopsy: virtuous autopsy. Radiol Med 114:1367–1382

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Frøen JF, Cacciatore J, McClure EM, Kuti O, Jokhio AH, Islam M, Shiffman J, Lancet’s Stillbirths Series steering committee (2011) Stillbirths: why they matter. Lancet 377:1353–1366

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Flenady V, Koopmans L, Middleton P, Frøen JF, Smith GC, Gibbons K, Coory M, Gordon A, Ellwood D, McIntyre HD, Fretts R, Ezzati M (2011) Major risk factors for stillbirth in high-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 377:1331–1340

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Goldenberg RL, McClure EM, Bhutta ZA, Belizan JM, Reddy UM, Rubens CE, Mabeya H, Flenady V, Darmstadt GL, Lancet’s Stillbirths Series steering committee (2011) Stillbirths: the vision for 2020. Lancet 377:1798–1805

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pattinson R, Kerber K, Buchmann E, Friberg IK, Belizan M, Lansky S, Weissman E, Mathai M, Rudan I, Walker N, Lawn JE, Lancet’s Stillbirths Series steering committee (2011) Stillbirths: how can health systems deliver for mothers and babies? Lancet 377:1523–1538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Thayyil S, Sebire NJ, Chitty LS, Wade A, Olsen O, Gunny RS, Offiah A, Saunders DE, Owens CM, Chong WK, Robertson NJ, Taylor AM (2011) Post mortem magnetic resonance imaging in the fetus, infant and child: a comparative study with conventional autopsy (MaRIAS Protocol). BMC Pediatr 11:120

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Helgadõttir LB, Turowski G, Skjeldestad FE, Jacobsen AF, Sandset PM, Roald B, Jacobsen EM (2013) Classification of stillbirths and risk factors by cause of death. A case-control study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 92:325–333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. King JF, Warren RA (2006) The role of reviews of perinatal deaths. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 11:79–87

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Nappi L, Trezza F, Bufo P, Riezzo I, Turillazzi E, Borghi C, Bonaccorsi G, Scutiero G, Fineschi V, Greco P (2016) Classification of stillbirths is an ongoing dilemma. J Perinat Med. doi:10.1515/jpm-2015-0318

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ofir K, Kalter A, Moran O, Sivan E, Schiff E, Simchen MJ (2013) Subsequent pregnancy after stillbirth: obstetrical and medical risks. J Perinat Med 41:543–548

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Woodward PJ, Sohaey R, Harris DP, Jackson GM, Klatt EC, Alexander AL, Kennedy A (1997) Postmortem fetal MR imaging: comparison with findings at autopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 168:41–46

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Huisman TA (2004) Magnetic resonance imaging: an alternative to autopsy in neonatal death? Semin Neonatol 9:347–353

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Whitby EH, Paley MN, Cohen M, Griffiths PD (2005) Postmortem MR imaging of the fetus: an adjunct or a replacement for conventional autopsy? Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 10:475–483

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Griffiths PD, Paley MN, Whitby EH (2005) Post-mortem MRI as an adjunct to fetal or neonatal autopsy. Lancet 365:1271–1273

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Becker GJ (2005) Virtues of virtual autopsy. J Am Coll Radiol 2:376–378

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dirnhofer R, Jackowski C, Vock P, Potter K, Thali MJ (2006) Virtopsy: minimally invasive, imaging-guided virtual autopsy. Radiographics 26:1305–1333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Brookes JS, Hagmann C (2006) MRI in fetal necropsy. J Magn Reson Imaging 24:1221–1228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Whitby EH, Paley MN, Cohenb M, Griffiths PD (2006) Post-mortem fetal MRI: what do we learn from it? Eur J Radiol 57:250–255

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Clarot F, Proust B, Eurin D, Vaz E, Le Dosseur P (2007) Sudden infant death syndrome and virtual autopsy: scalpel or mouse? Arch Pediatr 14:623–629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Rutty GN, Rutty JE (2001) Perceptions of near virtual autopsies. J Forensic Leg Med 18:306–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Valdés Dapena M, Huff DS (1983) Perinatal autopsy manual. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  25. Pomara C, Karch SB, Fineschi V (2010) Forensic autopsy. A handbook and atlas. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  26. Arthurs OJ, Barber JL, Taylor AM, Sebire NJ (2015) Normal perinatal and paediatric post-mortem magnetic resonance imaging appearances. Pediatr Radiol 45:527–535

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Bonetti LR, Ferrari P, Trani N, Maccio L, Laura S, Giuliana S, Facchinetti F, Rivasi F (2011) The role of fetal autopsy and placental examination in the causes of fetal death: a retrospective study of 132 cases of stillbirths. Arch Gynecol Obstet 283:231–241

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Miller ES, Minturn L, Linn R, Weese-Mayer DE, Ernst LM (2016) Stillbirth evaluation: a stepwise assessment of placental pathology and autopsy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 214:115e1–115e6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Heller DS, Faye-Petersen OM (2015) Pathology of the stillborn infant for the general pathologist: part 1. Adv Anat Pathol 22:1–28

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Fretts RC, Boyd ME, Usher RH, Usher HA (1992) The changing pattern of fetal death, 1961–1988. Obstet Gynecol 79:35–39

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Fretts RC (2005) Etiology and prevention of stillbirth. Am J Obst Gynecol 193:1923–1935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Vergani P, Cozzolino S, Pozzi E, Cuttin MS, Greco M, Ornaghi S, Lucchini V (2008) Identifyng the causes of stillbirth: a comparison of four classification systems. Am J Obstet Gynecol 199:319e1–319e4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lamont K, Scott NW, Jones GT, Bhattacharya S (2015) Risk of recurrent stillbirth: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 350:h3080

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Simpson LL (2002) Maternal medical disease: risk of antepartum fetal death. Semin Perinatol 26:42–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Korteweg FJ, Erwich JJ, Holm JP, Ravisé JM, van der Meer J, Veeger NJ, Timmer A (2009) Diverse placental pathologies as the main causes of fetal death. Obstet Gynecol 114:809–817

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. McClure EM, Dudley DJ, Reddy UM, Goldenberg RL (2010) Infectious causes of stillbirth: a clinical perspective. Clin Obstet Gynecol 53:635–645

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Frøen JF, Gardosi JO, Thurmann A, Francis A, Stray-Pedersen B (2004) Restricted fetal growth in sudden intrauterine unexplained death. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 83:801–807

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Italian Ministry of Health. Decree October 7, 2014. www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2014/11/22/14A08847/sg

  39. Gorincour G, Chaumoitre K, Bourliere-Najean B, Bretelle F, Sigaudy S, D’Ercole C, Philip N, Potier A, Petit P, Panuel M (2014) Fetal skeletal computed tomography: when? How? Why? Diagn Interv Imaging 95:1045–1053

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Votino C, Cannie M, Segers V, Dobrescu O, Dessy H, Gallo V, Cos T, Damry N, Jani J (2012) Virtual autopsy by computed tomographic angiography of the fetal heart: a feasibility study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 39:679–684

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Sarda-Quarello L, Bartoli C, Laurent PE, Torrents J, Piercecchi-Marti MD, Sigaudy S, Ariey-Bonnet D, Gorincour G (2016) Whole body perinatal postmortem CT angiography. Diagn Interv Imaging 97:121–124

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Sarda-Quarello L, Tuchtan L, Torrents J, Piercecchi-Marti MD, Bartoli C, Laurent PE, Bourlière-Najean B, Petit P, Quarello E, Gorincour G (2015) Perinatal death: is there a place for post-mortem angio-CT? J Forensic Radiol Imaging 3:1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Arthurs OJ, Thayyil S, Pauliah SS, Jacques TS, Chong WK, Gunny R, Saunders D, Addison S, Lally P, Cady E, Jones R, Norman W, Scott R, Robertson NJ, Wade A, Chitty L, Taylor AM, Sebire NJ, Magnetic Resonance Imaging Autopsy Study (MARIAS) Collaborative Group (2015) Diagnostic accuracy and limitations of post-mortem MRI for neurological abnormalities in fetuses and children. Clin Radiol 70:872–880

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Orasanu E, Melbourne A, Cardoso MJ, Modat M, Taylor AM, Thayyil S, Ourselin S (2014) Brain volume estimation from post-mortem newborn and fetal MRI. Neuroimage Clin 6:438–444

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Arthurs OJ, Thayyil S, Olsen OE, Addison S, Wade A, Jones R, Norman W, Scott RJ, Robertson NJ, Taylor AM, Chitty LS, Sebire NJ, Owens CM, Magnetic Resonance Imaging Autopsy Study (MARIAS) Collaborative Group (2014) Diagnostic accuracy of post-mortem MRI for thoracic abnormalities in fetuses and children. Eur Radiol 24:2876–2884

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Thayyil S, Cleary JO, Sebire NJ, Scott RJ, Chong K, Gunny R, Owens CM, Olsen OE, Offiah AC, Parks HG, Chitty LS, Price AN, Yousry TA, Robertson NJ, Lythgoe MF, Taylor AM (2009) Post-mortem examination of human fetuses: a comparison of whole-body high-field MRI at 9.4 T with conventional MRI and invasive autopsy. Lancet 374:467–475

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Sarikouch S, Haas NA, Schaeffler R, Beerbaum P (2008) Value of postmortem magnetic resonance imaging for fatal neonatal congenital heart disease: a case report. Pediatr Cardiol 29:667–669

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Taylor AM, Sebire NJ, Ashworth MT, Schievano S, Scott RJ, Wade A, Chitty LS, Robertson N, Thayyil S, Magnetic Resonance Imaging Autopsy Study Collaborative Group (2014) Postmortem cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in fetuses and children. A masked comparison study with conventional autopsy. Circulation 129:1937–1944

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Arthurs OJ, Owens CM, Olsen OE, Wade A, Addison S, Jones R, Norman W, Scott RJ, Robertson NJ, Taylor AM, Chitty LS, Sebire NJ, Magnetic Resonance Imaging Autopsy Study (MaRIAS) Collaborative Group (2015) Diagnostic accuracy of post mortem MRI for abdominal abnormalities in foetuses and children. Eur J Radiol 84:474–481

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Addison S, Arthurs OJ, Thayyil S (2014) Post-mortem MRI as an alternative to non-forensic autopsy in foetuses and children: from research into clinical practice. Br J Radiol 87:20130621

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Arthurs OJ, Calder AD, Klein WM (2015) Is there still a role for foetal and perinatal post-mortem radiography? J Forensic Radiol Imaging 3:5–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Arthurs OJ, Thayyil S, Addison S, Wade A, Jones R, Norman W, Scott R, Robertson NJ, Chitty LS, Taylor AM, Sebire NJ, Offiah AC, and for the Magnetic Resonance Imaging Autopsy Study (MARIAS) Collaborative Group (2014) Diagnostic accuracy of postmortem MRI for musculoskeletal abnormalities in fetuses and children. Prenat Diagn 34:1254–1261

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Ofir K, Kalter A, Moran O, Sivan E, Schiff E, Simchen MJ (2013) Subsequent pregnancy after stillbirth: obstetrical and medical risks. J Perinat Med 41:543–548

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Thayyl S, Sebire NJ, Chitty LS, Wade A, Chong WK, Isen O, Gunny RS, Offiah AC, Owens CM, Saunders DE, Scott RJ, Jones R, Norman W, Addison S, Bainbridge A, Cady EB, De Vita E, Robertson NJ, Taylor AM, MARIAS collaborative group (2013) Post-mortem MRI versus conventional autopsy in fetuses and children: a prospective validation study. Lancet 382:223–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Gorincour G, Sarda-Quarello L, Laurent PE, Brough A, Rutty GN (2015) The future of pediatric and perinatal postmortem imaging. Pediatr Radiol 45:509–516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Cohen MC, Whitby E (2007) The use of magnetic resonance in the hospital and coronial pediatric postmortem examination. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 3:289–296

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Guglielmi G, Nasuto M, Pinto A (2015) Forensic and medico-legal radiology: challenges, issues and new perspectives. Radiol Med 120:777–778

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic and Orthopaedic Sciences, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 336, 00185, Rome, Italy

    Annamaria Vullo, Mariarosaria Aromatario, Luigi Cipolloni, Paola Frati, Alessandro Santurro & Vittorio Fineschi

  2. Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and Anatomical Pathology, Sapienza University of Rome, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161, Rome, Italy

    Valeria Panebianco, Giuseppe Cannavale, Francesco Vullo & Carlo Catalano

Authors
  1. Annamaria Vullo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Valeria Panebianco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Giuseppe Cannavale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mariarosaria Aromatario
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Luigi Cipolloni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Paola Frati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Alessandro Santurro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Francesco Vullo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Carlo Catalano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Vittorio Fineschi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vittorio Fineschi.

Ethics declarations

Funding

This study did not receive grants.

Conflict of interest

Annamaria Vullo, Valeria Panebianco, Giuseppe Cannavale, Mariarosaria Aromatario, Luigi Cipolloni, Paola Frati, Alessandro Santurro, Francesco Vullo, Carlo Catalano and Vittorio Fineschi declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures involving human participants in this study have been approved by the ethical committee and have been carried out in accordance with The Code of Ethics of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vullo, A., Panebianco, V., Cannavale, G. et al. Post-mortem magnetic resonance foetal imaging: a study of morphological correlation with conventional autopsy and histopathological findings. Radiol med 121, 847–856 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-016-0672-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11547-016-0672-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation