International journal of legal medicine · 2014
Can post-mortem CT reliably distinguish between drowning and non-drowning asphyxiation?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Van Hoyweghen Astrid J L, Jacobs Werner, Op de Beeck Bart, Parizel Paul M
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to evaluate whether previously reported post-mortem CT findings in drowning can reliably distinguish drowning from asphyxiation by any other manner.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cases (n = 14) were corpses with cause of death determined as drowning by concordant autopsy findings and physical and circumstantial evidence. Controls (n = 11) were corpses in which the cause of death was defined as asphyxiation by any other manner than submersion in a liquid. Images were evaluated for the presence of fluid in paranasal sinuses, mastoid air cells and lower airways, frothy foam in the upper airways, ground-glass opacity of the lung parenchyma, the height of the right hemi-diaphragm, the interpulmonary distance at the level of the aortic valve, the mean density of intracardiac blood, and gastric and esophageal contents. Descriptive statistics, Fisher's exact test, and Student's t test were used when appropriate.
RESULTS: Only the height of the right hemi-diaphragm differed significantly (p = 0.045) between cases (mean 5.4) and controls (mean 4.3). Other findings were not significantly different between both groups.
CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that it is not possible to reliably distinguish drowning from non-drowning asphyxiation on CT, because many findings in drowning were also present in non-drowning asphyxiation. CT indicators for drowning as the cause of death should therefore be defined with great caution, keeping in mind that they are not specific to only a single cause of death.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cases (n = 14) were corpses with cause of death determined as drowning by concordant autopsy findings and physical and circumstantial evidence. Controls (n = 11) were corpses in which the cause of death was defined as asphyxiation by any other manner than submersion in a liquid. Images were evaluated for the presence of fluid in paranasal sinuses, mastoid air cells and lower airways, frothy foam in the upper airways, ground-glass opacity of the lung parenchyma, the height of the right hemi-diaphragm, the interpulmonary distance at the level of the aortic valve, the mean density of intracardiac blood, and gastric and esophageal contents. Descriptive statistics, Fisher's exact test, and Student's t test were used when appropriate.
RESULTS: Only the height of the right hemi-diaphragm differed significantly (p = 0.045) between cases (mean 5.4) and controls (mean 4.3). Other findings were not significantly different between both groups.
CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that it is not possible to reliably distinguish drowning from non-drowning asphyxiation on CT, because many findings in drowning were also present in non-drowning asphyxiation. CT indicators for drowning as the cause of death should therefore be defined with great caution, keeping in mind that they are not specific to only a single cause of death.