ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is reason to believe that the diagnosis of septic and toxic shock, as indicated on the death certificate, cannot be confirmed as the cause of death without autopsy and subsequent histological analysis. The external examination of the corpse can therefore not represent the sole basis for a reliable statement about the infection status of a corpse, e. g. as a prerequisite for embalming. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The validity of autopsy in determining septic and toxic shock as the cause of death is demonstrated in 7 exemplary cases. RESULTS: Decades of experience in a university pathology institute have shown that an external examination of the corpse alone is not suitable for certifying the cause of death if an infectious disease is suspected. Consequently, only autopsy with subsequent histological analysis provides reliable statements on the etiopathogenesis of the underlying process. Possible problems and discrepancies between clinical and pathological diagnoses are discussed on the basis of several cases with or without autoptic confirmation of the septic shock. The case of a missionary from Africa infected with Lassa virus serves to point out the seriousness of the threat an undiagnosed infection may represent to the attending staff. CONCLUSION: During the treatment of patients suspected to have an infectious cause of fever of unknown origin, compliance with the usual safety regulations, including adequate disinfecting measures, is essential. In cases with fatal outcome, not infrequently under the clinical picture of a septic and toxic shock, autopsy should be regularly performed to confirm the type of infection and the infectious cause of death. Rapid and open communication between the professional groups involved plays a crucial role in this process.