Cargando…

Are non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques for detecting cause of death in prenates, neonates and infants accurate? A systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy

OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques in deaths under 1 year of age. DESIGN: This is a systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy. The protocol is registered on PROSPERO. PARTICIPANTS: Deaths from conception to one adjusted year of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: O'Keefe, Hannah, Shenfine, Rebekka, Brown, Melissa, Beyer, Fiona, Rankin, Judith
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9827258/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36609326
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064774
_version_ 1784867034133168128
author O'Keefe, Hannah
Shenfine, Rebekka
Brown, Melissa
Beyer, Fiona
Rankin, Judith
author_facet O'Keefe, Hannah
Shenfine, Rebekka
Brown, Melissa
Beyer, Fiona
Rankin, Judith
author_sort O'Keefe, Hannah
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques in deaths under 1 year of age. DESIGN: This is a systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy. The protocol is registered on PROSPERO. PARTICIPANTS: Deaths from conception to one adjusted year of age. SEARCH METHODS: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), the Cochrane Library, Scopus and grey literature sources were searched from inception to November 2021. DIAGNOSTIC TESTS: Non-invasive or minimally invasive diagnostic tests as an alternative to traditional autopsy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Studies were included if participants were under one adjusted year of age, with index tests conducted prior to the reference standard. Data were extracted from eligible studies using piloted forms. Risk of bias was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. A narrative synthesis was conducted following the Synthesis without Meta-Analysis guidelines. Vote counting was used to assess the direction of effect. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Direction of effect was expressed as percentage of patients per study. FINDINGS: We included 54 direct evidence studies (68 articles/trials), encompassing 3268 cases and eight index tests. The direction of effect was positive for postmortem ultrasound and antenatal echography, although with varying levels of success. Conversely, the direction of effect was against virtual autopsy. For the remaining tests, the direction of effect was inconclusive. A further 134 indirect evidence studies (135 articles/trials) were included, encompassing 6242 perinatal cases. The addition of these results had minimal impact on the direct findings yet did reveal other techniques, which may be favourable alternatives to autopsy. Seven trial registrations were included but yielded no results. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence is insufficient to make firm conclusions about the generalised use of non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques in relation to all perinatal population groups. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021223254.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9827258
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98272582023-01-10 Are non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques for detecting cause of death in prenates, neonates and infants accurate? A systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy O'Keefe, Hannah Shenfine, Rebekka Brown, Melissa Beyer, Fiona Rankin, Judith BMJ Open Pathology OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques in deaths under 1 year of age. DESIGN: This is a systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy. The protocol is registered on PROSPERO. PARTICIPANTS: Deaths from conception to one adjusted year of age. SEARCH METHODS: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), the Cochrane Library, Scopus and grey literature sources were searched from inception to November 2021. DIAGNOSTIC TESTS: Non-invasive or minimally invasive diagnostic tests as an alternative to traditional autopsy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Studies were included if participants were under one adjusted year of age, with index tests conducted prior to the reference standard. Data were extracted from eligible studies using piloted forms. Risk of bias was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. A narrative synthesis was conducted following the Synthesis without Meta-Analysis guidelines. Vote counting was used to assess the direction of effect. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Direction of effect was expressed as percentage of patients per study. FINDINGS: We included 54 direct evidence studies (68 articles/trials), encompassing 3268 cases and eight index tests. The direction of effect was positive for postmortem ultrasound and antenatal echography, although with varying levels of success. Conversely, the direction of effect was against virtual autopsy. For the remaining tests, the direction of effect was inconclusive. A further 134 indirect evidence studies (135 articles/trials) were included, encompassing 6242 perinatal cases. The addition of these results had minimal impact on the direct findings yet did reveal other techniques, which may be favourable alternatives to autopsy. Seven trial registrations were included but yielded no results. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence is insufficient to make firm conclusions about the generalised use of non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques in relation to all perinatal population groups. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021223254. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9827258/ /pubmed/36609326 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064774 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Pathology
O'Keefe, Hannah
Shenfine, Rebekka
Brown, Melissa
Beyer, Fiona
Rankin, Judith
Are non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques for detecting cause of death in prenates, neonates and infants accurate? A systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy
title Are non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques for detecting cause of death in prenates, neonates and infants accurate? A systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy
title_full Are non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques for detecting cause of death in prenates, neonates and infants accurate? A systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy
title_fullStr Are non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques for detecting cause of death in prenates, neonates and infants accurate? A systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy
title_full_unstemmed Are non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques for detecting cause of death in prenates, neonates and infants accurate? A systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy
title_short Are non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques for detecting cause of death in prenates, neonates and infants accurate? A systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy
title_sort are non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy techniques for detecting cause of death in prenates, neonates and infants accurate? a systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy
topic Pathology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9827258/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36609326
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064774
work_keys_str_mv AT okeefehannah arenoninvasiveorminimallyinvasiveautopsytechniquesfordetectingcauseofdeathinprenatesneonatesandinfantsaccurateasystematicreviewofdiagnostictestaccuracy
AT shenfinerebekka arenoninvasiveorminimallyinvasiveautopsytechniquesfordetectingcauseofdeathinprenatesneonatesandinfantsaccurateasystematicreviewofdiagnostictestaccuracy
AT brownmelissa arenoninvasiveorminimallyinvasiveautopsytechniquesfordetectingcauseofdeathinprenatesneonatesandinfantsaccurateasystematicreviewofdiagnostictestaccuracy
AT beyerfiona arenoninvasiveorminimallyinvasiveautopsytechniquesfordetectingcauseofdeathinprenatesneonatesandinfantsaccurateasystematicreviewofdiagnostictestaccuracy
AT rankinjudith arenoninvasiveorminimallyinvasiveautopsytechniquesfordetectingcauseofdeathinprenatesneonatesandinfantsaccurateasystematicreviewofdiagnostictestaccuracy