The most recent research from St Luke's University Health Network suggests that Imaging Autopsy and Traditional Autopsy are complementary and synergistic in nature. Should we use either one or both on routine basis, especially given that the number of traditional autopsies continues to decline? Is it better to know a little about the cause of death, or is it better to know nothing? Which option would you choose?
interesting !
When two subjects are "complementary and synergetic", as you mention, both should be used as a synergetic complement, never as a substitute for the other.
With the recent advances for perfection of imagiology, I also face the same question, in regards of substituting Medical dissection for teaching purposes. People don't like dirt in their hands. But I believe that it is important that people should learn how to wash and disinfect their hands, And nothing should substitute good methods that proved useful over the centuries, even more, because they also have technological evolved.
Methods in Medicine should be used in complementary synergism, in our goal for perfection, because we cannot allow ourselves to fail (even if only in small details) !
Thank you for your interesting question.
Patrick,
I think it's probably more appropriate to look at "agreement" between the two than "sensitivity / specificity", especially since some categories are almost "exclusive" to one or the other method. The level of agreement varies from around 0.1 for things like ectopic air (better on CT) to 0.8 for "facial fractures". I will post the completed abstract online once we submit it... should be in a couple of weeks. I'm very excited about it!
Stan.
Both can work together very well. In many institutions now imaging is carried out on all cadavers prior to autopsy so it is used as an adjunct. In some judicial systems as in England, there are far too many traditional autopsies, and the virtual approach can be quite useful with the agreement of the Coroner and the requirements of society as to what would be expected to be ascertained and to what extent. accuracy is required in many routine natural deaths. However, the important issue is acceptability by courts and in particular what the shortcomings might be in presenting the evidence in court.
Like all branches of medicine, we must welcome all the up to date tools that we can use to assist us to modernize our practice, at the same ensuring that quality of the end result is improved rather than compromised.
My experience in the conduction of Autopsies indicate that if both are used it will be very helpful in the final opinion and decision making,if the facilities are available.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Zoology
- Invertebrate Zoology
- Arthropods
- Insects