Advertisement

La radiologia medica

, Volume 124, Issue 2, pp 109–117 | Cite as

Postmortem computed tomography angiography (PMCTA) and traditional autopsy in cases of sudden cardiac death due to coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Raffaele La Russa
  • Carlo Catalano
  • Mariantonia Di Sanzo
  • Matteo Scopetti
  • Vittorio Gatto
  • Alessandro Santurro
  • Rocco Valerio Viola
  • Valeria Panebianco
  • Paola Frati
  • Vittorio FineschiEmail author
ETHICS AND FORENSIC RADIOLOGY
  • 61 Downloads

Abstract

Introduction

Several studies have been performed to assess the efficacy of postmortem computed tomography angiography (PMCTA) in solving cases of sudden cardiac death, even in comparison with the traditional autopsy. However, the results were often inconsistent and inconclusive. Therefore, a global discussion on the subject through a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis is necessary.

Methods

A systematic search of PubMed was performed up to April 23, 2018. Studies exploring the role of PMCTA in cases of sudden cardiac death and the accuracy of this method in diagnosing the cause of death compared to traditional autopsy were included.

Results

The overall sensitivity and specificity of the seven included studies, using conventional autopsy as a reference standard, were 92% and 95%, respectively. The positive and negative likelihood ratios were, respectively, 20.76 (95% CI 1.16–370.2) and 0.08 (95% CI 0.03–0.17), showing that PMCTA represents a strong indicator of the posttest probability of disease. The diagnostic odds ratio and the area under the curve were, respectively, 261.54 (95% CI 1.87–5760.53) and 0.93 (95% CI 0.90–0.95), indicating a high diagnostic power of the test.

Conclusion

PMCTA demonstrated a high accuracy in the diagnosis of parietal and luminal coronary changes but was less effective in detecting myocardial ischemia and necrosis. Therefore, the only radiological investigation is often insufficient to determine the cause of sudden death and the conventional autopsy remains the gold standard. However, PMCTA can improve the performance of the autopsy, serving as an aid and guide in the sampling phase for histopathological investigations.

Keywords

Postmortem computed tomography angiography Traditional autopsy Sudden cardiac death Coronary artery disease 

Notes

Authors’ contribution

All authors contributed to manuscript drafting and critical discussion and approved the definitive version.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standards

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors. All accepted principles of ethical and professional conduct have been followed.

References

  1. 1.
    Priori SG, Aliot E, Blomstrom-Lundqvist C, Bossaert L, Breithardt G, Brugada P, Camm AJ, Cappato R, Cobbe SM, Di Mario C, Maron BJ, McKenna WJ, Pedersen AK, Ravens U, Schwartz PJ, Trusz-Gluza M, Vardas P, Wellens HJ, Zipes DP (2001) Task force on sudden cardiac death of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 22:1374–1450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hayashi M, Shimizu W, Albert C (2015) The spectrum of epidemiology underlying sudden cardiac death. Circ Res 116(12):1887–1906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Basso C, Aguilera B, Banner J, Cohle S, d’Amati G, de Gouveia RH, di Gioia C, Fabre A, Gallagher PJ, Leone O, Lucena J, Mitrofanova L, Molina P, Parsons S, Rizzo S, Sheppard MN, Mier MPS, Kim Suvarna S, Thiene G, van der Wal A, Vink A, Michaud K (2017) Guidelines for autopsy investigation of sudden cardiac death: 2017 update from the Association for European Cardiovascular Pathology. Virchows Arch 6:691–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Burton JL, Underwood J (2007) Clinical, educational, and epidemiological value of autopsy. Lancet 369:1471–1480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bolliger SA, Thali MJ, Ross S, Buck U, Naether S, Vock P (2008) Virtual autopsy using imaging: bridging radiologic and forensic sciences. A review of the virtopsy and similar projects. Eur Radiol 18(2):273–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Westphal SE, Apitzsch JC, Penzkofer T, Kuhl CK, Mahnken AH, Knüchel R (2014) Contrast-enhanced postmortem computed tomography in clinical pathology: enhanced value of 20 clinical autopsies. Hum Pathol 45(9):1813–1823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vullo A, Panebianco V, Cannavale G, Aromatario M, Cipolloni L, Frati P, Santurro A, Vullo F, Catalano C, Fineschi V (2016) Post-mortem magnetic resonance foetal imaging: a study of morphological correlation with conventional autopsy and histopathological findings. Radiol Med 121(11):847–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lundström C, Persson A, Ross S, Ljung P, Lindholm S, Gyllensvärd F, Ynnerman A (2012) State-of-the-art of visualization in post-mortem imaging. APMIS 120:316–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bolliger SA, Thali MJ (2015) Imaging and virtual autopsy: looking back and forward. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 370:1674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pomara C, Fineschi V, Scalzo G, Guglielmi G (2009) Virtopsy versus digital autopsy: virtuous autopsy. Radiol Med 114:1367–1382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    De Marco E, Vacchiano G, Frati P, La Russa R, Santurro A, Scopetti M, Guglielmi G, Fineschi V (2018) Evolution of post-mortem coronary imaging: from selective coronary arteriography to post-mortem CT-angiography and beyond. Radiol Med 123(5):351–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saunders SL, Morgan B, Raj V, Rutty GN (2011) Post-mortem computed tomography angiography: past, present and future. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 7:271–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dirnhofer R, Jackowski C, Vock P, Potter K, Thali MJ (2006) Virtopsy: minimally invasive, imaging-guided virtual autopsy. Radiographics 26:1305–1333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Plos Med 6(7):e.1000097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Liberati A (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 151(4):W65–W94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leeflang M (2014) Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of diagnostic test accuracy. Clin Microbiol Infect 20(2):105–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim K, Lee J, Choi S, Huh J, Park S (2015) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating diagnostic test accuracy: a practical review for clinical researchers-part I. General guidance and tips. Korean J Radiol 16(6):1175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee J, Kim K, Choi S, Huh J, Park S (2015) Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies evaluating diagnostic test accuracy: a practical review for clinical researchers-part II. Statistical methods of meta-analysis. Korean J Radiol 16(6):1188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liu Z, Yao Z, Li C, Liu X, Chen H, Gao C (2013) A step-by-step guide to the systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic and prognostic test accuracy evaluations. Br J Cancer 108(11):2299–2303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bolliger S, Filograna L, Spendlove D, Thali M, Dirnhofer S, Ross S (2010) Postmortem imaging-guided biopsy as an adjuvant to minimally invasive autopsy with CT and postmortem angiography: a feasibility study. Am J Roentgenol 195(5):1051–1056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Roberts IS, Benamore RE, Peebles C, Roobottom C, Traill ZC (2011) Diagnosis of coronary artery disease using minimally invasive autopsy: evaluation of a novel method of post-mortem coronary CT angiography. Clin Radiol 66:645–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ross SG, Thali MJ, Bolliger S, Germerott T, Ruder TD, Flach PM (2012) Sudden death after chest pain: feasibility of virtual autopsy with postmortem CT angiography and biopsy. Radiology 264:250–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Michaud K, Grabherr S, Doenz F, Mangin P (2012) Evaluation of postmortem MDCT and MDCT-angiography for the investigation of sudden cardiac death related to atherosclerotic coronary artery disease. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 28:1807–1822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Morgan B, Biggs M, Barber J, Raj V, Amoroso J, Hollingbury F, Robinson C, Rutty G (2012) Accuracy of targeted post-mortem computed tomography coronary angiography compared to assessment of serial histological sections. Int J Legal Med 127(4):809–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Inokuchi G, Yajima D, Hayakawa M, Motomura A, Chiba F, Torimitsu S, Makino Y, Iwase H (2013) The utility of postmortem computed tomography selective coronary angiography in parallel with autopsy. Forensic Sci Med Pathol 9(4):506–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Polacco M, Sedati P, Arena V, Pascali VL, Zobel BB, Oliva A, Rossi R (2014) Visualization of myocardial infarction by post-mortem single-organ coronary computed tomography: a feasibility study. Int J Legal Med 129(3):517–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Grabherr S, Grimm J, Dominguez A, Vanhaebost J, Mangin P (2014) Advances in post-mortem CT-angiography. Br J Radiol 87(1036):20130488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Turillazzi E, Frati P, Pascale N, Pomara C, Grilli G, Viola RV, Fineschi V (2016) Multi-phase post-mortem CT-angiography: a pathologic correlation study on cardiovascular sudden death. J Geriatr Cardiol 13:855–865Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Guidi B, Aquaro GD, Gesi M, Emdin M, Di Paolo M (2018) Postmortem cardiac magnetic resonance in sudden cardiac death. Heart Fail Rev.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10741-018-9705-0 Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Heinemann A, Vogel H, Heller M, Tzikas A, Püschel K (2015) Investigation of medical intervention with fatal outcome: the impact of post-mortem CT and CT angiography. Radiol Med 120(9):835–845CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Takei H, Sano R, Takahashi Y, Takahashi K, Kominato Y, Tokue H, Shimada T, Awata S, Hirasawa S, Ohta N (2018) Usefulness of coronary postmortem computed tomography angiography to detect lesions in the coronary artery and myocardium in cases of sudden death. Leg Med (Tokyo) 30:46–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vogel B, Heinemann A, Tzikas A, Poodendaen C, Gulbins H, Reichenspurner H, Püschel K, Vogel H (2013) Post mortem computed tomography (PMCT) and PMCT-angiography after cardiac surgery Possibilities and limits. Arch Med Sad Kryminol 63(3):155–171Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vogel B, Heinemann A, Gehl A, Hasegawa I, Höpker WW, Poodendaen C, Tzikas A, Gulbins H, Reichenspurner H, Püschel K, Vogel H (2013) Post-mortem computed tomography (PMCT) and PMCT-angiography after transvascular cardiac interventions. Arch Med Sad Kryminol 63(3):255–266Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lee H, Park H, Cha JG, Lee S, Yang K (2015) Myocardial contrast defect associated with thrombotic coronary occlusion: pre-autopsy diagnosis of a cardiac death with post-mortem CT angiography. Korean J Radiol 16:1024–1028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    O’Donnell C (2010) An image of sudden death: utility of routine postmortem computed tomography scanning in medico-legal autopsy practice. Diagn Histopathol 16:552–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rüegger CM, Bartsch C, Martinez RM, Ross S, Bolliger SA, Koller B, Held L, Bruder E, Bode PK, Caduff R, Frey B, Schäffer L, Bucher HU (2014) Minimally invasive, imaging guided virtual autopsy compared to conventional autopsy in foetal, newborn and infant cases: study protocol for the paediatric virtual autopsy trial. BMC Pediatr 14:15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Aghayev E, Thali MJ, Sonnenschein M, Jackowski C, Dirnhofer R, Vock P (2007) Post-mortem tissue sampling using computed tomography guidance. Forensic Sci Int 166:199–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ebert LC, Ptacek W, Naether S, Fürst M, Ross S, Buck U, Weber S, Thali M (2010) Virtobot–a multi-functional robotic system for 3D surface scanning and automatic post mortem biopsy. Int J Med Robot 6:18–27Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Busardò FP, Frati P, Santurro A, Zaami S, Fineschi V (2015) Errors and malpractice lawsuits in radiology: what the radiologist needs to know. Radiol Med 120(9):779–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Grabherr S, Heinemann A, Vogel H, Rutty G, Morgan B, Woźniak K, Dedouit F, Fischer F, Lochner S, Wittig H, Guglielmi G, Eplinius F, Michaud K, Palmiere C, Chevallier C, Mangin P, Grimm JM (2018) Postmortem CT angiography compared with autopsy: a forensic multicenter study. Radiology 1:170559Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Poulsen K, Simonsen J (2007) Computed tomography as routine in connection with medico-legal autopsies. For Sci Int 171(2–3):190–197Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Flach PM, Thali MJ, Germerott T (2014) Times have changed! Forensic radiology-a new challenge for radiology and forensic pathology. Am J Roentgenol 202(4):W325–W334CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Italian Society of Medical Radiology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raffaele La Russa
    • 1
    • 2
  • Carlo Catalano
    • 3
  • Mariantonia Di Sanzo
    • 1
  • Matteo Scopetti
    • 1
  • Vittorio Gatto
    • 1
  • Alessandro Santurro
    • 1
  • Rocco Valerio Viola
    • 1
  • Valeria Panebianco
    • 3
  • Paola Frati
    • 1
    • 2
  • Vittorio Fineschi
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Anatomical, Histological, Forensic and Orthopaedic SciencesSapienza University of RomeRomeItaly
  2. 2.IRCCS NeuromedPozzilliItaly
  3. 3.Department of Radiological Sciences, Oncology and PathologySapienza UniversityRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations