• Forensic Sci. Int. · Nov 2006

    Review

    Drowning: still a difficult autopsy diagnosis.

    • Michel H A Piette and Els A De Letter.
    • Ghent University, Department of Forensic Medicine, Jozef Kluyskensstraat 29, 9000 Gent, Belgium. Michel.Pitte@UGent.be
    • Forensic Sci. Int. 2006 Nov 10; 163 (1-2): 1-9.

    AbstractInvestigation of bodies recovered out of water comprises an important proportion of the medico-legal requests. However, the key question whether the victim died due to "true" drowning can frequently not easily be solved. In addition, the diagnosis of hydrocution is even more difficult. In this manuscript, a review of reported diagnostic methods is discussed in order to provide guidelines, which can be used in current forensic practice. In particular, the (dis)advantages of various biological and thanato-chemical methods, described in literature during the last 20 years, will be confronted with the classical techniques such as the detection of diatoms and algae. Indeed, the diatom test is still considered as the "golden standard". In conclusion, the ideal diagnostic test as definite proof for drowning still needs to be established. At present, the combination of the autopsy findings and the diatom test is a good compromise in arriving at a conclusion. Additional biochemical and technical methods could be useful. Unfortunately, the cost-benefit analysis in current practice could be hard to defend. However, the importance of this subject asks for further scientific approaches and research.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…