sentence delimiter is currently in use at
The Johns Hopkins Hospital, and is the sentence delimiter
suggested by the CAP Autopsy Committee ((23).
Database records
appearing in our proposed format can easily be reconstituted
to a user-readable form by a database engine.
USES OF THE AUTOPSY DATABASE.
An autopsy database accessible to all researchers will have great
value for epidemiologic studies. Since geographic location is one
of the demographic fields supplied by contributors (partial zip-code
for facesheets from the USA, and telephone-country-code for
facesheets contributed from outside the USA), studies can be
stratified by location. Similarly, patient age and year of autopsy
are provided, allowing researchers to analyze age-stratified disease
and causes of death as well as trends associated with the era
in which the autopsies were performed. Because review of glass
slides is usually necessary for pathologic studies and access to
tissue (as paraffin block sections) is required for molecular biology
studies, it is important that legitimate researchers have access to
original autopsy materials. Although the database maintains the
confidentiality of patients, care-givers, and institutional
contributors, we have a tentative plan for those who wish
to have prepared tissue sections. The web-site provides an
e-mail linkage to the database administrator, who forwards requests
to the Institution that contributed the relevant autopsies. It is
then up to the Institution to contact the person requesting access to
detailed records, slides, or tissues. Collaborative research studies
might be arranged by this method. In this manner, the contributing
institution maintains control of the amount of information and
material released to researchers. Our hope is that the database will
grow to become one of the richest and most accessible sources
of autopsy lesions, and that researchers worldwide will utilize
the database to further our understanding of all diseases that are
sampled at autopsy.
In the 105 years of its existence, cases from the autopsy files
of The Johns Hopkins Hospital have provided materials for over
1200 peer-reviewed
publications appearing in academic journals.
We propose that a public database containing contributed autopsies
from any interested contributing institution will have even greater
value for research and epidemiologic studies. It is important
to recognize that the envisioned autopsy database will not be
an unbiased sample of all deaths. Autopsies are only performed
for a minority of deaths. Currently they are seldom performed
on patients dying at home of natural causes. The autopsy rate
in Muslim countries is close to zero, and a review of international
autopsy rates shows that most of the sampled countries have
low autopsy rates
(24).
Since only a small proportion of
institutions that perform autopsies are likely to contribute
to a voluntary autopsy database, the database population will not
represent any identifiable demographic group. Regardless, there are
appropriate intellectual paradigms for managing information
of this nature. Since the patient's age, sex, and year of death
are provided with each facesheet, the results on a large,
potentially biased autopsy sample could be age-adjusted and
sex-adjusted by standard epidemiologic methods. McFarlane
and coworkers
(25,
26)
have suggested the paradigm of
an 'epidemiologic necropsy', in which clinical information known
about the patient prior to death is used to stratify or pro-rate
autopsy information from heterogeneous sources. In particular,
cases with a 'necropsy surprise', i.e., autopsy diagnoses which
were unsuspected or unknown clinically, may be used as cases
for which no clinical bias based upon the surprise could have
influenced the selection of that patient for autopsy. Since it has
repeatedly been shown that about 15-25% of autopsies contain
a significant unsuspected or unknown finding
(27,
28,
29),
it seems that the necropsy surprise paradigm could be used
to evaluate data from an autopsy database.
In conclusion, it is our opinion that a public autopsy database
that contains information of value for epidemiologists and other
researchers is technically feasible using current technology.
Such a database can be designed to protect patient privacy and
to provide a computer-assigned cause of death in most cases.
Placing the autopsy database on the Internet maximizes its access
to researchers interested in using or contributing to the database.
REFERENCES.
1. Peery TM.
The autopsy data bank. A proposal for pathologists
to contribute to the health care of the nation.
Am J Clin Pathol. 1978;69(Suppl):258-259.
2. Carter JR, Nash NP, Cechner RL, Platt RD.
Proposal for a national autopsy data bank.
A potential major contribution of pathologists
to the health care of the nation.
Am J Clin Pathol. 1981;76 (Suppl): 597-617.
3. Kircher T, Carter JR, Sinton E.
The national autopsy databank.
Pathologist. 1985; 39:22-26.
4. Frey CM, McMillen MM, Cowan CD, Horm JW, Kessler LG.
Representativeness of the surveillance, epidemiology,
and end results program data: recent trends in cancer mortality rate.
JNCI 1992; 84:872-877.
5. Ashworth TG.
Inadequacy of death certification: proposal for change.
J Clin Pathol. 1991; 44:265-268.
6. Bjornsson J, Jonasson JG, Nielsen GP.
The accuracy of death certificates.
Lab Invest. 1992;66:106A.
7. Kircher T, Nelson J, Burdo H.
The autopsy as a measure of accuracy of the death certificate.
N Engl J Med. 1985;313:1263-1269.
8. Kircher T, Anderson RE.
Cause of death: proper completion of the death certificate.
JAMA. 1987;258:349-352.
9. Erlander D.
Computer data processing of medical diagnoses in pathology.
Am J Clin Pathol. 1975;63:538-544.
10. Slater DN,
Certifying the cause of death: an audit of wording inaccuracies.
J Clin Pathol. 1993;46:232-234.
11. Walter SD, Birnie SE.
Mapping mortality and morbidity patterns:
an international comparison.
Intl J Epidemiol. 1991;20:678-689.
12. Moore GW, Boitnott JK, Miller RE, Eggleston JC,
Hutchins GM.
Integrated pathology reporting, indexing, and retrieval
system using natural language diagnoses.
Modern Pathol. 1988;1:44-50.
13. Schneier B.
Applied Cryptography.
Protocols, Algorithms, and Source Code in C.
New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1994;:.
14. Cole SK.
Accuracy of death certificates in neonatal deaths.
Community Medicine 1989; 11:1-8.
15. Dunn PM.
The search for perinatal definitions and standards.
Acta Paediatr Scand Suppl. 1985;319:7-16.
16. Lammer EJ, Brown EJ, Anderka MT, Guyer B.
Classification and analysis of fetal deaths in Massachusetts.
J Amer Med Assn. 1989;261:1757-1762.
17. Valdes-Dapena MA, Arey JB.
The causes of neonatal mortality:
An analysis of 501 autopsies on newborn infants.
J Pediatr 1970;77:366-375.
18. Alberman E, Botting B, Blachley N, Twidell A.
A new hierarchical classification of causes of infant deaths
in England and Wales.
Arch Dis Childh 1994;70:403-409.
19. Saller DN jr, Lesser KB, Harrel U, Rogers BB, Oyer CE.
The clinical utility of the perinatal autopsy.
J Amer Med Assn. 1995;273:663-665.
20. Hanzlick R, ed.
The medical cause of death manual.
Instructions for writing cause of death statements for deaths
due to natural causes.
Northfield, IL: College of American Pathologists, 1994.
21. Moore GW, Miller RE, Hutchins GM.
Indexing by MeSH titles of natural language pathology phrases
identified on first encounter using the barrier word method.
In: Scherrer JR, Cote RA, Mandil SH, eds.
Computerized Natural Medical Language Processing
for Knowledge Representation.
Amsterdam: North-Holland; 1989: 29-39.
22. Berman JJ, Moore GW.
SNOMED-encoded surgical pathology databases:
A tool for epidemiologic investigation.
Mod Pathol. 1996 Sep;9(9):944-950.
PMID: 8878028.
PubMed Entry
Full Text of Article:
http://www.netautopsy.org/snomedsp.htm
23. Hutchins GM, Berman JJ, Moore GW, Hanzlick R,
Autopsy Committee of the College of American Pathologists.
Practice guidelines for autopsy pathology: autopsy reporting.
Autopsy Committee of the College of American Pathologists.
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1999 Nov;123(11):1085-1092.
Full Text of Article:
http://www.netautopsy.org/pracguid.htm
24. Svendsen E, Hill RB.
Autopsy legislation and practice in various countries.
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1987; 111:846-850.
25. McFarlane MJ, Feinstein AR, Wells CK, Chan CK.
The 'epidemiologic necropsy'. Unexpected detections,
and changing rates of lung cancer.
JAMA. 1987; 258:331-338.
26. McFarlane MJ.
Clinical diagnosis is not a source
of bias in selection for necropsy.
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1989;113:64-67.
27. Goldman L, Sayson R, Robbins S, Cohn LH, Bettmann M,
Weisberg M.
The value of the autopsy in three medical eras.
N Engl J Med. 1983; 308:1000-1005.
28. Goldman L.
Diagnostic advances versus the value of the autopsy: 1912-1980.
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1984; 108:501-505.
29. Cameron HM, McGoogan E.
A prospective study of 1152 hospital autopsies.
1. Inaccuracies in death certification.
J Pathol. 1981; 133: 273-283.
TABLE 1. CAUSE OF DEATH GROUPS.
Group A: Likely as Immediate Cause of Death.
Group B: Likely as Intermediate Cause of Death.
Group C: Likely as Underlying Cause of Death.
----------------------------------------
Group D: Likely as Other Significant Condition.
Group E: Likely as Risk Factor.
TABLE 2. CAUSE OF DEATH THESAURUS,
FREQUENCY AT LEAST 50 CASES.
FREQUENCY
GROUP A: LIKELY IMMEDIATE CAUSE OF DEATH.
Fetal pneumonia...........................211
Pneumothorax..............................149
Hydrocephalus..............................76
Bronchopneumonia...........................61
Sepsis.....................................61
GROUP B: LIKELY INTERMEDIATE CAUSE OF DEATH.
Hyaline membrane disease..................240
Hydrops...................................155
Hypoplasia lung...........................105
Meconium aspiration........................61
GROUP C: LIKELY UNDERLYING CAUSE OF DEATH.
Chorioamnionitis..........................360
Brain hemorrhage..........................303
Malformation..............................224
Abruptio placentae........................108
Ventricular septal defect.................107
Trisomy....................................86
Atrial septal defect.......................73
Necrotizing enterocolitis..................55
GROUP D: LIKELY OTHER SIGNIFICANT CONDITIONS.
Caesarean section..........................275
Breech delivery...........................198
Premature rupture membranes...............164
Twin pregnancy............................156
Premature labor...........................148
Oligohydramnios...........................106
Polyhydramnios.............................73
GROUP E: LIKELY RISK FACTORS.
Maternal toxemia...........................73
Maternal diabetes..........................59
TABLE 3. REPRESENTATIVE AUTOPSY REPORT
IN SUGGESTED FORMAT.
###1^0D^W^F^1988^212^NONE
CLINICAL HISTORY:
Pregnancy in a 27 year old, Coombs negative, Rubella
immune, white female; hypertension; hospitalization;
medications; ultrasound demonstrating viable gestational sac;
polyhydramnios, possible esophageal atresia per sonogram;
pre-eclampsia; Aldomet; absence of fetal movement;
absence of fetal heart sounds with no fetal heart motion
confirmed by sonogram; fetal death in utero;
admission to hospital following rupture of membranes;
pitocin-induced vaginal delivery of stillborn female fetus
delivery of placenta.
ANATOMICAL DIAGNOSIS:
Premature female fetus, anatomic age consistent with
38 weeks gestation (weight 1900 gm, crown-heel length 43 cm,
crown-rump length 31 cm, right foot length 6.3 cm).
Atresia, esophagus.
Sanguineous pleural effusions, right 15 ml, left 15 ml.
Cephalohematoma, scalp.
CAUSE OF DEATH:
Hydrops.
Esophageal atresia.
----------------------------------------
Polyhydramnios.
Risk Factor - toxemia.
NOTE: denotes carriage-return-line-feed (ASCII 13, 10).
denotes blank space (ASCII 32).
Last updated: 9/15/2005, by G. William Moore, MD, PhD.