Advertisement

Intensive Care Medicine

, Volume 30, Issue 11, pp 2080–2085 | Cite as

Post mortem examination in the intensive care unit: still useful?

  • George Dimopoulos
  • Michael Piagnerelli
  • Jacques Berré
  • Isabelle Salmon
  • Jean-Louis VincentEmail author
Original

Abstract

Objective

Post mortem examination rates have decreased worldwide and their usefulness has been challenged. The aim of this study was to compare ante- versus post mortem findings in a multidisciplinary ICU.

Design

Retrospective study.

Setting

Thirty-one-bed, medico-surgical ICU.

Patients

All patients who died on the ICU and underwent an autopsy examination in 1999.

Measurements

Records from autopsies were compared with clinical records. A modified Goldman’s criteria was used to categorize the post mortem diagnoses. Unexpected findings were evaluated according to the duration of hospitalization prior to death (fewer than or more than 10 days).

Results

Among 2,984 ICU admissions, there were 489 deaths; 222 autopsies were conducted (45.4% autopsy rate). Post mortem examination revealed unexpected findings in 50 patients (22.5%), including malignancy (22 [9.9%]), fungal infections (9 [4%]), pulmonary embolism (7 [3.2%]), nosocomial infections (3 [1.3%]), Hashimoto’s disease (3 [1.3%]), mesenteric infarction (2 [0.9%]), Barrett’s esophagus (2 [0.9%]), endocarditis (1 [0.5%]) and myocardial infarction (1 [0.5%]). These unexpected findings were considered as major (Class I/II) in 19 (8.5%), and minor (Class III) in 31 (14%) patients. In patients with a short ICU length of stay (<10 days), there were more major unexpected findings than minor, while after a prolonged stay (>10 days), minor unexpected findings were more common.

Conclusions

After a short ICU stay (<10 days), autopsy revealed discrepancies primarily related to the cause of death associated with diseases whose diagnosis can be difficult. Following more prolonged ICU stays (>10 days), autopsy was more likely to reveal coexisting diseases unrelated to death.

Keywords

Autopsy Intensive care Length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay Cause of death 

Supplementary material

Table S1 Autopsy studies in the adult ICU population

supp.pdf (142 kb)
(PDF 143 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    Cabot RC (1912) Diagnostic pitfalls identified during a study of three thousand autopsies. JAMA 59:2295–2298Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Roberts WC (1978) The autopsy: its decline and a suggestion for its revival. N Engl J Med 299:332–338PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Loughrey MB, McCluggage WG, Toner PG (2000) The declining autopsy rate and clinicians’ attitudes. Ulster Med J 69:83–89PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Veress B, Alafuzoff I (1993) Clinical diagnostic accuracy audited by autopsy in a university hospital in two eras. Qual Assur Health Care 5:281–286PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baker PB, Zarbo RJ, Howanitz PJ (1996) Quality assurance of autopsy face sheet reporting, final autopsy report turnaround time and autopsy rates: a College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of 10,003 autopsies from 418 institutions. Arch Pathol Lab Med 120:1003–1008PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blosser SA, Zimmerman HE, Stauffer JL (1998) Do autopsies of critically ill patients reveal important findings that were clinically undetected? Crit Care Med 26:1332–1336CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Landefeld CS, Chren MM, Myers A, Geller R, Robbins S, Goldman L (1988) Diagnostic yield of the autopsy in a university hospital and a community hospital. N Engl J Med 318:1249–1254PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rao MG, Rangwala AF (1990) Diagnostic yield from 231 autopsies in a community hospital. Am J Clin Pathol 93:486–490PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boers M, Nieuwenhuyzen Kruseman AC, Eulderink F, Hermans J, Thompson J (1988) Value of autopsy in internal medicine: a 1-year prospective study of hospital deaths. Eur J Clin Invest 18:314–320PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sarode VR, Datta BN, Banerjee AK, Banerjee CK, Joshi K, Bhusnurmath B, Radotra BD (1993) Autopsy findings and clinical diagnoses: a review of 1,000 cases. Hum Pathol 24:194–198CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mort TC, Yeston NS (1999) The relationship of pre mortem diagnoses and post mortem findings in a surgical intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 27:299–303Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Roosen J, Frans E, Wilmer A, Knockaert DC, Bobbaers H (2000) Comparison of premortem clinical diagnoses in critically iII patients and subsequent autopsy findings. Mayo Clin Proc 75:562–567PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Twigg SJ, McCrirrick A, Sanderson PM (2001) A comparison of post mortem findings with post hoc estimated clinical diagnoses of patients who die in a United Kingdom intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med 27:706–710Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stevanovic G, Tucakovic G, Dotlic R, Kanjuh V (1986) Correlation of clinical diagnoses with autopsy findings: a retrospective study of 2,145 consecutive autopsies. Hum Pathol 17:1225–1230PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Goldman L, Sayson R, Robbins S, Cohn LH, Bettmann M, Weisberg M (1983) The value of the autopsy in three medical eras. N Engl J Med 308:1000–1005PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Combes A, Mokhtari M, Couvelard A, Trouillet JL, Baudot J, Henin D, Gibert C, Chastre J (2004) Clinical and autopsy diagnoses in the intensive care unit: a prospective study. Arch Intern Med 164:389–392CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nadrous HF, Afessa B, Pfeifer EA, Peters SG (2003) The role of autopsy in the intensive care unit. Mayo Clin Proc 78:947–950PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Perkins GD, McAuley DF, Davies S, Gao F (2003) Discrepancies between clinical and postmortem diagnoses in critically ill patients: an observational study. Crit Care 7:R129–R132CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kirch W, Schafii C (1996) Misdiagnosis at a university hospital in 4 medical eras. Medicine (Baltimore) 75:29–40Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sonderegger-Iseli K, Burger S, Muntwyler J, Salomon F (2000) Diagnostic errors in three medical eras: a necropsy study. Lancet 355:2027–2031CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shojania KG, Burton EC, McDonald KM, Goldman L (2003) Changes in rates of autopsy-detected diagnostic errors over time: a systematic review. JAMA 289:2849–2856CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pastores SM, Halpern NA (1999) Autopsies in the ICU: we still need them! Crit Care Med 27:235–236Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nemetz PN, Beard CM, Ballard DJ, Ludwig J, Tangalos EG, Kokmen E, Weigel KM, Belau PG, Bourne WM, Kurland LT (1989) Resurrecting the autopsy: benefits and recommendations. Mayo Clin Proc 64:1065–1076PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tai DY, El Bilbeisi H, Tewari S, Mascha EJ, Wiedemann HP, Arroliga AC (2001) A study of consecutive autopsies in a medical ICU: a comparison of clinical cause of death and autopsy diagnosis. Chest 119:530–536CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Silfvast T, Takkunen O, Kolho E, Andersson LC, Rosenberg P (2003) Characteristics of discrepancies between clinical and autopsy diagnoses in the intensive care unit: a 5-year review. Intensive Care Med 29:321–324PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Marwick C (1995) Pathologists request autopsy revival. JAMA 273:1889–1891CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Anderson RE (1984) The autopsy as an instrument of quality assessment. Classification of premortem and postmortem diagnostic discrepancies. Arch Pathol Lab Med 108:490–493PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ferretti GR, Bosson JL, Buffaz PD, Ayanian D, Pison C, Blanc F, Carpentier F, Carpentier P, Coulomb M (1997) Acute pulmonary embolism: role of helical CT in 164 patients with intermediate probability at ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy and normal results at duplex US of the legs. Radiology 205:453–458PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gouello JP, Asfar P, Brenet O, Kouatchet A, Berthelot G, Alquier P (2000) Nosocomial endocarditis in the intensive care unit: an analysis of 22 cases. Crit Care Med 28:377–382CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Geha DJ, Roberts GD (1994) Laboratory detection of fungemia. Clin Lab Med 14:83–97PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Battle RM, Pathak D, Humble CG, Key CR, Vanatta PR, Hill RB, Anderson RE (1987) Factors influencing discrepancies between premortem and postmortem diagnoses. JAMA 258:339–344CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fernandez-Segoviano P, Lazaro A, Esteban A, Rubio JM, Iruretagoyena JR (1988) Autopsy as quality assurance in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 16:683–685PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Veress B, Alafuzoff I (1994) A retrospective analysis of clinical diagnoses and autopsy findings in 3,042 cases during two different time periods. Hum Pathol 25:140–145CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gut AL, Ferreira AL, Montenegro MR (1999) Autopsy: quality assurance in the ICU. Intensive Care Med 25:360–363CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Podbregar M, Voga G, Krivec B, Skale R, Pareznik R, Gabrscek L (2001) Should we confirm our clinical diagnostic certainty by autopsies? Intensive Care Med 27:1750–1755Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • George Dimopoulos
    • 1
  • Michael Piagnerelli
    • 1
  • Jacques Berré
    • 1
  • Isabelle Salmon
    • 2
  • Jean-Louis Vincent
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Intensive Care, Erasme University HospitalFree University of BrusselsBrusselsBelgium
  2. 2.Department of Pathology, Erasme University HospitalFree University of BrusselsBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations