We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

ESPR postmortem imaging task force: where we begin | SpringerLink

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Skip to main content

ESPR postmortem imaging task force: where we begin


A new task force on postmortem imaging was established at the annual meeting of the European Society of Paediatric Radiology (ESPR) in Graz, Austria, in 2015. The postmortem task force is separate from the child abuse task force as it covers all aspects of fetal, neonatal and non-forensic postmortem imaging. The main focus of the task force is the guidance and standardization of non-radiographic postmortem imaging, particularly postmortem CT and postmortem MRI. This manuscript outlines the starting point of the task force, with a mission statement, outline of current experience, and short- and long-term goals.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.


  1. 1.

    Rutty GN, Brogdon G, Dedouit F et al (2013) Terminology used in publications for post-mortem cross-sectional imaging. Int J Legal Med 127:465–466

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Arthurs OJ, van Rijn RR, Sebire NJ (2014) Current status of paediatric post-mortem imaging: an ESPR questionnaire-based survey. Pediatr Radiol 44:244–251

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Calder AC, Offiah AC (2015) Fetal radiography for suspected skeletal dysplasia: technique, normal appearances, diagnostic approach. Pediatr Radiol 45:536–548

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Royal College of Pathologists Working Party on the Autopsy (2006) Guidelines on Autopsy Practice: Scenario 9: Stillborn infant (singleton). June 2006. http://www.rcpath.org/Resources/RCPath/Migrated%20Resources/Documents/G/G001Autopsy-Stillbirths-Jun06.pdf. Accessed 25 Nov 2015

  5. 5.

    Arthurs OJ, Calder AC, Kiho L et al (2014) Routine perinatal and paediatric post mortem radiography: detection rates and practice implications. Pediatr Radiol 44:252–257

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Olsen EØE, Espeland A, Maartmann-Moe H et al (2003) Diagnostic value of radiography in cases of perinatal death: a population based study. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 88:F521–F524

    CAS  Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Votino C, Bessieres B, Segers V et al (2014) Minimally invasive fetal autopsy using three-dimensional ultrasound: a feasibility study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. doi:10.1002/uog.14642

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Charlier P, Chaillot PF, Watier L et al (2013) Is post-mortem ultrasonography a useful tool for forensic purposes? Med Sci Law 3:227–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Prodhomme O, Baud C, Saguintaah M et al (2015) Principles of fetal postmortem ultrasound: a personal review. J Forensic Radiol Imaging 3:12–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Sarda-Quarello L, Tuchtan L, Bartoli C et al (2015) Post-mortem perinatal imaging: state of the art and perspectives, with an emphasis on ultrasound. Gynecol Obstet Fertil 43:612–615

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Jawad N, Sebire NJ, Wade A et al (2015) Bodyweight limits of fetal post mortem MRI at 1.5T. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. doi:10.1002/uog.14948

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Breeze ACG, Jessop FA, Whitehead AL et al (2008) Feasibility of percutaneous organ biopsy as part of a minimally invasive perinatal autopsy. Virchows Arch 452:201–207

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Garg S, Basu S, Mohan H et al (2009) Comparison of needle autopsy with conventional autopsy in neonates. Fetal Pediatr Pathol 28:139–150

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Fariña J, Millana C, Fdez-Aceñero J et al (2002) Ultrasonographic autopsy (echopsy): a new autopsy technique. Virchows Arch 440:635–639

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    O’Donoghue K, O’Regan KN, Sheridan CP et al (2012) Investigation of the role of computed tomography as an adjunct to autopsy in the evaluation of stillbirth. Eur J Radiol 81:1667-1675

  16. 16.

    Proisy M, Marchand AJ, Loget P et al (2013) Whole-body post-mortem computed tomography compared with autopsy in the investigation of unexpected death in infants and children. Eur Radiol 23:1711–1719

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Arthurs OJ, Guy A, Thayyil S et al (2015) Comparison of diagnostic performance for perinatal and paediatric post-mortem imaging: CT versus MRI. Eur Radiol. PMID: 26489748

  18. 18.

    Oyake Y, Aoki T, Shiotani S et al (2006) Postmortem computed tomography for detecting causes of sudden death in infants and children: retrospective review of cases. Radiat Med 24:493–502

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Hong TS, Reyes JA, Moineddin R et al (2011) Value of postmortem thoracic CT over radiography in imaging of pediatric rib fractures. Pediatr Radiol 41:736–748

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Arthurs OJ, Guy A, Kiho L et al (2015) Ventilated postmortem computed tomography in children: feasibility and initial experience. Int J Legal Med 129:1113–1120

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Votino C, Cannie M, Segers V et al (2012) Virtual autopsy by computed tomographic angiography of the fetal heart: a feasibility study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 39:679–684

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Sarda-Quarello L, Bartoli C, Laurent PE et al (2015) Whole body perinatal postmortem CT angiography. Diagn Interv Imaging 97:121–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Rüegger CM, Bartsch C, Martinez RM et al (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 14:15

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Brookes JA, Hall-Craggs MA, Sams VR et al (1996) Non-invasive perinatal necropsy by magnetic resonance imaging. Lancet 348:1139–1141

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Woodward PJ, Sohaey R, Harris DP et al (1987) Postmortem fetal MR imaging: comparison with findings at autopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 168:41–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

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

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Thayyil S, Schievano S, Robertson NJ et al (2009) A semi-automated method for non-invasive internal organ weight estimation by post-mortem magnetic resonance imaging in fetuses, newborns and children. Eur J Radiol 72:321–326

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Prodhomme O, Seguret F, Martrille L et al (2012) Organ volume measurements: comparison between MRI and autopsy findings in infants following sudden unexpected death. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 97:F434–F438

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Votino C, Verhoye M, Segers V et al (2012) Fetal organ weight estimation by postmortem high-field magnetic resonance imaging before 20 weeks’ gestation. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 39:673–678

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Thayyil S, Sebire NJ, Chitty LS et al (2013) Post-mortem MRI versus conventional autopsy in fetuses and children: a prospective validation study. Lancet 382:223–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Arthurs OJ, Thayyil S, Owens CM et al (2015) Diagnostic accuracy of post mortem MRI for abdominal abnormalities in foetuses and children. Eur J Radiol 84:474–481

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Arthurs OJ, Thayyil S, Olsen OE et al (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 

  33. 33.

    Arthurs OJ, Taylor AM, Sebire NJ (2015) Indications, advantages and limitations of perinatal post mortem imaging in clinical practice. Pediatr Radiol 45:491–500

  34. 34.

    Arthurs OJ, Barber J, Taylor AM et al (2015) Normal perinatal and paediatric post mortem magnetic resonance imaging appearance. Pediatr Radiol 45:527–535

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    The Royal College of Child Health and Paediatrics and The Royal College of Radiologists (2008) Standards for radiological investigations of suspected non-accidental injury. London; RCPCH. Ref BFCR(08)1. https://www.rcr.ac.uk/publication/standards-radiological-investigations-suspected-non-accidental-injury. [Accessed 05 Jan 2016]

  36. 36.

    Ruder TD (2013) What are the key objectives of the ISFRI?—evaluation of the ISFRI member survey. J Forensic Radiol Imaging 1:142–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Ruder TD, Ross SG, Hatch GM (2013) Second congress of the International Society of Forensic Radiology and Imaging (ISFRI) - towards a joint future in forensic imaging. J Forensic Radiol Imaging 1:146–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


O. J. Arthurs is funded by a National Institute of Health Research (NIHR, United Kingdom) Clinician Scientist Fellow award. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the National Health Service, the NIHR or the Department of Health of the United Kingdom.

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Owen J. Arthurs.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest


Additional information

Mission statement

The purposes of this task force are to guide postmortem imaging development regarding clinical utility and diagnostic accuracy, foster multinational research and develop best practice guidelines as this subspecialty grows in the future.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arthurs, O.J., van Rijn, R.R., Whitby, E.H. et al. ESPR postmortem imaging task force: where we begin. Pediatr Radiol 46, 1363–1369 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-016-3639-2

Download citation


  • Autopsy
  • Child
  • Computed tomography
  • Imaging
  • Minimally invasive postmortem examination
  • Magnetic resonance imaging
  • Postmortem