[Forensic autopsies and pathological examination: Current practice in Montpellier's jurisdiction. A retrospective study of 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.