[Forensic autopsies and pathological examination: Current practice in Montpellier's jurisdiction. A retrospective study of 630 autopsies]. / Autopsies judiciaires et expertises anatomopathologiques complémentaires : état des pratiques sur le ressort de la cour d'appel de Montpellier. Étude rétrospective de 630 autopsies.

INTRODUCTION: In France, pathological examination is not systematically required in forensic autopsies. The factors affecting the decision to carry out a pathological expertise have not yet been defined. The aim of this study was to describe in which conditions a pathological expertise was required after forensic autopsy by the high court of Montpellier. METHODS: This study included and analyzed retrospectively all of the autopsy elements, of all forensic autopsies carried out over a year. These elements were classified: pre-autopsy, per-autopsy, and post-autopsy. RESULTS: A pathological expertise was required in 19.2% of 630 cases, among which 31% in a context of undetermined cause of death and in 14% of cases of determined causes of death. The forensic practitioner recommended a pathological expertise in 10 to 31% of autopsies. Overall, 64 pathological examinations were realized out of 121 recommended examinations (52.9%), this rate varied from 25 to 73% depending on the court. The magistrate tended to favor anatomopathological expertise in cases of determined causes of death, and in certain manner of death (80% homicide versus 35% natural). The pathologist's expertise enabled to change the cause of death in 22% of cases and the manner of death in 19%. The pathological approach was a major asset in the 65% of unknown manner of deaths and in the 20% of natural, whereas the expertise did not help in cases of homicides, suicides and accidents. The cause of death was modified in 5.6% of initially determined causes of death, against 42.9% in case of initially unknown cause. CONCLUSION: The use of pathologic examination in forensic autopsies is scarce and uneven. The factors resulting to its request are not directly linked to its scientific assets. A conjoint work between forensic and pathologist practitioners would be beneficial.

Cytokines as new biomarkers of skin wound vitality.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of skin wound vitality is currently based on standard histology, but histological findings lack sensitivity in case of a short survival time. New reliable biomarkers of vitality are therefore strongly needed. We assessed the ability of 10 candidate cytokines (IFN-γ, IL-1ß, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL-12p70, IL-13, TNF-α) to discriminate between vital and early post-mortem wounds. METHODS: Twenty-four cadavers with a recent open skin wound (< 3 h) were included (20 men, 4 women, mean age = 51.0 ± 24.3 years). An early post-mortem wound was performed in an uninjured skin area, and both wounds were sampled at the autopsy (post-mortem interval (PMI) = 66.3 ± 28.3 h). Needle-puncture sites related to resuscitation cares were included as very early post-mortem wounds (n = 6). In addition to standard histology, cytokines levels were simultaneously measured in each sample using a multiplex sandwich immunoassay, then normalized on healthy skin levels. A quantitative evaluation of IL-8-positive cells in ante- and post-mortem wound samples was also performed. RESULTS: In the training set of samples (n = 72), cytokine levels were significantly higher in vital wounds (mean age = 47 ± 53 min) than in post-mortem wounds (mean PMI = 6.9 ± 9.0 h) (p < 0.2), except for two cytokines (IFN-γ and IL-2). IL-8 was the best discriminatory cytokine (Se = 54%, Sp = 100%, AUC = 0.79), while a multivariate model combining IL-4 and IL12p70 was a bit more discriminant (Se = 55%, Sp = 100%, AUC = 0.84). In the validation set (n = 72), the discriminatory power of the cytokines and the predictive model was slightly lower, with IL-8 remaining the best cytokine (Se = 46%, Sp = 96%, AUC = 0.75). The predictive model remained highly specific (Sp = 100%). Both the cytokines and the predictive model allowed the iatrogenic injuries to be correctly classified as post-mortem wounds. Standard histology and immunohistochemistry showed 21% sensitivity and a specificity of 79% and 100%, respectively. Only two iatrogenic wounds could be properly categorized histologically. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that cytokines could be useful biomarkers of skin wound vitality and that the immunoassay method could be more sensitive than immunohistochemistry to identify wounds with a short survival time. Further research is underway to confirm these preliminary data.