Comprehensive anatomy of the superior hypogastric plexus and its relationship with pelvic surgery landmarks: defining the safe zone around the promontory.

BACKGROUND: Pelvic surgery carries an inherent risk of autonomic nerve injury leading to genitourinary and bowel dysfunction due to the close proximity of the superior hypogastric plexus (SHP). The aim of this study was to define the detailed anatomy of SHP and identify its relationship with the vascular landmarks and ureters for pelvic autonomic nerve-preserving surgery. METHODS: A cadaveric study on the detailed anatomy of the SHP was conducted in our surgical anatomy research unit. Between 02/2019 and 10/2019, macroscopic anatomical dissections were performed on 45 fresh adult cadavers (39 male, 6 female). Distances between the SHP, major vascular structures, and other anatomical landmarks were measured. RESULTS: Three types of SHP morphology were observed: mesh (64.8%), single nerve (24.4%), and fiber (10.8%). SHP bifurcation was located inferior to the aortic bifurcation in all cases; however, it was observed cranial to the promontory in 80% of the cases, whereas 18% were caudally and 2% were over the promontory. The closest vessels to the left and right of the SHP bifurcation were the left common iliac vein (LCIV) (86.2%, the mean distance was 8.49 ± 7.97 mm) and the right internal iliac artery (RIIA) (48.2%, mean distance was 13.4 ± 9.79 mm), respectively. At SHP bifurcation level, the lateral edge of the SHP was detected on the LCIV in 22 cases and on the RIIA in 10 cases for the left and right side of the plexus, respectively. The distance between the SHP bifurcation and the ureter was 27.9 mm on the right and 24.2 mm on the left. The width of the left (LHN) and right hypogastric nerves (RHN) were 4.35 mm and 4.62 mm at 2 cm below the SHP bifurcation, respectively. LHN was on the vascular structures in 13 cases, whereas RHN in only 1 case, 2 cm below the SHP bifurcation. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the location of the SHP, including its relationship with important anatomical landmarks, might prevent iatrogenic injury and reduce postoperative morbidity in the pelvic surgery setting.

Comparison of autopsy findings and injury severity scores in deaths due to traumatic asphyxia (perthes syndrome).

Traumatic asphyxia is a rare clinical syndrome usually caused by sudden and severe thoracic and/or thoracoabdominal compression. It presents with craniofacial cyanosis, petechiae, and subconjunctival haemorrhages. The present study employed a postmortem retrospective methodology to analyse autopsy findings and accompanying injuries in cases of death due to traumatic asphyxia. Four years of case files from a morgue department at a forensic medicine institute were searched and 53 cases of lethal traumatic asphyxia were found. These cases were then classified into groups and compared using the Injury Severity Score (ISS) and New Injury Severity Score (NISS) indices to measure trauma. RESULTS: The individuals had died due to occupational (n = 28; 52.8%), farm (n = 10; 18.9%), traffic (n = 9; 17.0%) or household (n = 6; 11.3%) accidents. At the external examination, conjunctival petechiae (60.4%) and petechiae on the face/neck (52.8%); at the autopsy, subpleural petechiae (58.5%) and petrous ridge hemorrgahe (without skull base fracture) (56.6%) were the most common findings. A finding of petrous ridge hemorrgahe was very common in the cases without any accompanying injuries (Group A in which mean Injury Severity Score was 0.83 ±â€¯0.98). Traumatic asphyxia is usually suspected from the given circumstances before an autosopy is performed. In cases without hospitalisation, any of the following signs may lead the physician to diagnose traumatic asphyxia as the cause of death: petechiae on the upper parts of the body and conjunctiva, petechiae on serous membranes (including subpleural regions), signs of petrous ridge haemorrhage without skull base fracture.

Limitations of cadaveric organ donation on judicial cases and problems confronted in autopsy: Istanbul data in comparative perspective.

Organ transplantation is one of the most important services of modern medicine to the humanity. In judicial death cases the interaction between judicial needs and transplantation needs is inevitable and both should be provided in a short time before the decomposition of the body. Thus, the description of this interaction and the algorithm which should be carried out to manage these cases are important. Aim of this study is to determine the problems confronted in forensic autopsies and to determine what to do for both judicial processes' and cadaveric organ donations' not becoming limited due to each other. With these aims, autopsy case archive of the Council of Forensic Medicine Istanbul Morgue Department was reviewed, between the years 2009 and 2011, to reveal the number of organ donors among autopsy cases and also to find out the judicial problems confronted during autopsies. Among 12,016 judicial death cases referred to Istanbul Morgue Department in 3 years, 35 cases were found to have undergone cadaveric solid organ harvesting procedure and 307 cases cornea-only harvesting procedure. Manner of deaths for organ donor cases were blunt trauma due to traffic accident in 20 cases, firearm injury in 3 cases, stabbing in 2 cases, suspicious criminal battery in 4 cases and fatal falls in 5 cases. Only 1 case was suspected to have died due to high dose insulin administration. Through the whole data presented in this study, it can be concluded that consulting with the Forensic Medicine Expert not only for the autopsies but also during the clinical process of a judicial case, who is a candidate to be an organ donor, is absolutely important. The early contribution of the Forensic Medicine Expert would provide help to plan both the judicial process and the transplantation process which needs urgent decisions. A Forensic Medicine Expert may be an organ harvest team member performing initial investigations on the cause of death and collecting some of the toxicological screening samples when needed.