Cadaver clots: a systematic review of the literature.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, LEGAL Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology Pub Date : 2025-03-03 DOI:10.1007/s12024-025-00976-y
Biagio Solarino, Laura Ambrosi, Marcello Benevento, Davide Ferorelli, Claas Buschmann, Simona Nicolì
{"title":"Cadaver clots: a systematic review of the literature.","authors":"Biagio Solarino, Laura Ambrosi, Marcello Benevento, Davide Ferorelli, Claas Buschmann, Simona Nicolì","doi":"10.1007/s12024-025-00976-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cadaveric blood is ubiquitous, and observed in various forms-liquid, coagulated, and clot-like-during autopsies. Understanding its state in postmortem vessels is essential for both scientific research and forensic investigations. Pulmonary thromboembolism (PT) is a leading cause of sudden death, often requiring medicolegal evaluation. While thrombus formation is primarily explained by Virchow's triad, the distinction between antemortem, agonal, and postmortem clot (PMC) pathogenesis remains debated. This study aims to systematically review the literature to clarify the morphological and pathological differences among these entities in forensic practice. A systematic review of PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted using predefined key terms: \"clot,\" \"thrombus,\" \"chicken-fat,\" \"agonal,\" \"postmortem,\" and \"autopsy.\" Articles were screened for relevance, and 11 studies meeting the inclusion criteria were analyzed. The review highlights a significant gap in comparative studies addressing antemortem versus postmortem clots. The literature lacks a consensus regarding their definitions, macroscopic and microscopic characteristics, pathogenesis, and relevance to determining the cause and timing of death. Existing studies present conflicting interpretations, limiting the reliability of forensic differentiation. The current understanding of antemortem, agonal, and postmortem clots remains incomplete. Our findings underscore the need for further research to establish standardized criteria for distinguishing clot types, which is crucial for forensic pathology and medicolegal evaluations.</p>","PeriodicalId":12449,"journal":{"name":"Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-025-00976-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cadaveric blood is ubiquitous, and observed in various forms-liquid, coagulated, and clot-like-during autopsies. Understanding its state in postmortem vessels is essential for both scientific research and forensic investigations. Pulmonary thromboembolism (PT) is a leading cause of sudden death, often requiring medicolegal evaluation. While thrombus formation is primarily explained by Virchow's triad, the distinction between antemortem, agonal, and postmortem clot (PMC) pathogenesis remains debated. This study aims to systematically review the literature to clarify the morphological and pathological differences among these entities in forensic practice. A systematic review of PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted using predefined key terms: "clot," "thrombus," "chicken-fat," "agonal," "postmortem," and "autopsy." Articles were screened for relevance, and 11 studies meeting the inclusion criteria were analyzed. The review highlights a significant gap in comparative studies addressing antemortem versus postmortem clots. The literature lacks a consensus regarding their definitions, macroscopic and microscopic characteristics, pathogenesis, and relevance to determining the cause and timing of death. Existing studies present conflicting interpretations, limiting the reliability of forensic differentiation. The current understanding of antemortem, agonal, and postmortem clots remains incomplete. Our findings underscore the need for further research to establish standardized criteria for distinguishing clot types, which is crucial for forensic pathology and medicolegal evaluations.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology
Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology MEDICINE, LEGAL-PATHOLOGY
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
114
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology encompasses all aspects of modern day forensics, equally applying to children or adults, either living or the deceased. This includes forensic science, medicine, nursing, and pathology, as well as toxicology, human identification, mass disasters/mass war graves, profiling, imaging, policing, wound assessment, sexual assault, anthropology, archeology, forensic search, entomology, botany, biology, veterinary pathology, and DNA. Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology presents a balance of forensic research and reviews from around the world to reflect modern advances through peer-reviewed papers, short communications, meeting proceedings and case reports.
期刊最新文献
Death due to positional asphyxia related to underlying seizure disorder. Diagnosing coronary artery dissection using virtual autopsy in a resource-poor setting- a case report. Even if a genetic autopsy reveals a pathogenic variant, this should not prevent forensic experts from looking for other causes. Deaths in Mountains. Fatal Rhodococcus erythropolis endocarditis complicated by an abscess invading the atrioventricular node: a case report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1