Dutch guideline for clinical foetal-neonatal and paediatric post-mortem radiology, including a review of literature
Sonnemans, L. J.P.; Vester, M. E.M.; Kolsteren, E. E.M.; Erwich, J. J.H.M.; Nikkels, P. G.J.; Kint, P. A.M.; van Rijn, R. R.; Klein, W. M.; Duijst, W. L.J.M.; Hofman, P. A.M.; Kroll, J. J.F.; Renken, N. S.; Rosier, Y. O.; Scheeren, C. I.E.; Stomp, S. J.; van der Valk, P.; On Behalf Of The Dutch Post-Mortem Imaging Guideline Group
(2018) European Journal of Pediatrics, volume 177, issue 6, pp. 791 - 803
(Article)
Abstract
Clinical post-mortem radiology is a relatively new field of expertise and not common practice in most hospitals yet. With the declining numbers of autopsies and increasing demand for quality control of clinical care, post-mortem radiology can offer a solution, or at least be complementary. A working group consisting of radiologists,
... read more
pathologists and other clinical medical specialists reviewed and evaluated the literature on the diagnostic value of post-mortem conventional radiography (CR), ultrasonography, computed tomography (PMCT), magnetic resonance imaging (PMMRI), and minimally invasive autopsy (MIA). Evidence tables were built and subsequently a Dutch national evidence-based guideline for post-mortem radiology was developed. We present this evaluation of the radiological modalities in a clinical post-mortem setting, including MIA, as well as the recently published Dutch guidelines for post-mortem radiology in foetuses, neonates, and children. In general, for post-mortem radiology modalities, PMMRI is the modality of choice in foetuses, neonates, and infants, whereas PMCT is advised in older children. There is a limited role for post-mortem CR and ultrasonography. In most cases, conventional autopsy will remain the diagnostic method of choice. Conclusion: Based on a literature review and clinical expertise, an evidence-based guideline was developed for post-mortem radiology of foetal, neonatal, and paediatric patients.What is Known:• Post-mortem investigations serve as a quality check for the provided health care and are important for reliable epidemiological registration.• Post-mortem radiology, sometimes combined with minimally invasive techniques, is considered as an adjunct or alternative to autopsy.What is New:• We present the Dutch guidelines for post-mortem radiology in foetuses, neonates and children.• Autopsy remains the reference standard, however minimal invasive autopsy with a skeletal survey, post-mortem computed tomography, or post-mortem magnetic resonance imaging can be complementary thereof.
show less
Download/Full Text
Keywords: Autopsy, Foetal, Neonatal, Paediatric, Post-mortem, Radiology, Autopsy/methods, Humans, Child, Preschool, Infant, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Cause of Death, Radiography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Netherlands, Adolescent, Ultrasonography, Fetal Death/etiology, Child, Infant, Newborn, Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health, Review, Journal Article, Practice Guideline
ISSN: 0340-6199
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Note: Funding Information: This guideline was developed and sponsored by the Radiological Society of the Netherlands (NVvR), using governmental funding from the Stichting Kwaliteitsgelden Medisch Specialisten in the Netherlands (SKMS, Quality foundation of the Dutch Federation of Medical Specialists). The early preparative phase started July 2015 and the guideline will officially be authorized by the Radiological Society of the Netherlands at the end of 2017. The working group had nine in-person meetings (between September 2015 and September 2017) and otherwise communicated by phone and email. Decisions were made by consensus. At the start of guideline development, all working group members completed conflict of interest forms. Funding Information: Funding The development of the Dutch postmortem imaging guideline was funded by the Quality Foundation of the Dutch Medical Specialists (SKMS). Funding Information: M.M.J. Ploegmakers (Knowledge Institute of Medical Specialists, Utrecht, The Netherlands), M. Wessels (Knowledge Institute of Medical Specialists, Utrecht, The Netherlands), I.M.B. Russel (Department of Paediatrics, University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands), M. ten Horn (Patientfederation, Utrecht, the Netherlands), R. Kranenburg (Patientfederation, Utrecht, the Netherlands), D. van Meersbergen (The Royal Dutch Medical Association (KNMG), the Netherlands). The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Publisher Copyright: © 2018, The Author(s).
(Peer reviewed)