Tsokos M, Püschel K
Institute of Legal Medicine, University of Hamburg, Butenfeld 34, 22529 Hamburg, Germany.
Leg Med (Tokyo). 2001 Mar;3(1):15-22. doi: 10.1016/s1344-6223(01)00002-5.
The proof of a pathogenetic germ can be of evidential value for the medico-legal expertise concerning etiopathogenetic conclusions towards a causal relationship between infection and fatal outcome. In specific cases the forensic pathologist may be confronted with the decision whether cultures for postmortem bacteriological investigations should be obtained at autopsy. The present review surveys the value and practicability of postmortem bacteriological cultures in the light of the literature. The most promising media for postmortem bacteriological cultures are spleen and heart blood. In contrast, postmortem lung culture results are often unreliable due to frequently false positive results. The collection of specimens from at least two different sampling sites should be the standard procedure in cases where an underlying (potentially fatal) infection is presumed. Multiple postmortem cultures from different sampling sites raise the probability to identify the etiologic agent of antemortem infection. A careful correlation of culture results from different anatomical sampling sites with autopsy and histological findings is essential for the differentiation between vitally acquired infection and postmortem contamination. Various factors (e.g. the time interval between death and sampling of specimens, agonal spread of microorganisms or preceding antibiotic therapy prior to death) may limit the diagnostic utility of postmortem culture results. Contamination of specimens may, e.g. originate from inadequate sampling techniques, use of unsuitable transport media or postmortem growth of bacteria. The number of contaminated postmortem cultures increases when bowel manipulation or evisceration occurs prior to sampling and is depending on the anatomy of the sampling site. Polymicrobial growth can be considered contamination in the majority of cases. For the medico-legal expertise a thorough histological examination of inner organs and tissues is needed; the histological section has to represent the sampling site for culture. The presence of an underlying infection can be proven when postmortem bacteriological cultures yield a primary infectious pathogen and a cellular response in the affected tissue can be detected on the histopathological level. Postmortem bacteriology can be regarded as a reliable diagnostic tool for postmortem quality control of preceding diagnostic and therapeutic procedures and can serve as an additional indicator of nosocomial infections within a specific hospital environment. From the medico-legal point of view, a more widespread application of this valuable investigative procedure, that adds to diminish the number of otherwise unresolved deaths in forensic autopsy practice, is desirable.
对于涉及感染与致命结局之间因果关系的病因学结论的法医学鉴定而言,致病病原体的证据可能具有证据价值。在特定情况下,法医病理学家可能面临是否在尸检时获取用于死后细菌学调查的培养物的决策。本综述根据文献调查了死后细菌学培养的价值和实用性。死后细菌学培养最有前景的培养基是脾脏和心血。相比之下,死后肺培养结果往往不可靠,因为经常出现假阳性结果。在推测存在潜在(可能致命)感染的情况下,从至少两个不同采样部位采集标本应作为标准程序。来自不同采样部位的多次死后培养提高了识别生前感染病原体的概率。将来自不同解剖采样部位的培养结果与尸检和组织学发现进行仔细关联,对于区分生前获得性感染和死后污染至关重要。各种因素(例如死亡与标本采样之间的时间间隔、微生物的濒死期播散或死亡前的抗生素治疗)可能会限制死后培养结果的诊断效用。标本污染可能例如源于采样技术不当、使用不合适的运输培养基或死后细菌生长。在采样前进行肠道操作或取出内脏时,受污染的死后培养物数量会增加,并且取决于采样部位的解剖结构。在大多数情况下,多种微生物生长可被视为污染。对于法医学鉴定,需要对内部器官和组织进行全面的组织学检查;组织切片必须代表培养的采样部位。当死后细菌学培养产生主要感染病原体并且在组织病理学水平上可以检测到受影响组织中的细胞反应时,可以证明存在潜在感染。死后细菌学可被视为对先前诊断和治疗程序进行死后质量控制的可靠诊断工具,并且可作为特定医院环境中医院感染的额外指标。从法医学角度来看,希望更广泛地应用这种有价值的调查程序,这有助于减少法医尸检实践中其他未解决死亡的数量。