Conexiant
Login
  • The Analytical Scientist
  • The Cannabis Scientist
  • The Medicine Maker
  • The Ophthalmologist
  • The Pathologist
  • The Traditional Scientist
The Pathologist
  • Explore Pathology

    Explore

    • Latest
    • Insights
    • Case Studies
    • Opinion & Personal Narratives
    • Research & Innovations
    • Product Profiles

    Featured Topics

    • Molecular Pathology
    • Infectious Disease
    • Digital Pathology

    Issues

    • Latest Issue
    • Archive
  • Subspecialties
    • Oncology
    • Histology
    • Cytology
    • Hematology
    • Endocrinology
    • Neurology
    • Microbiology & Immunology
    • Forensics
    • Pathologists' Assistants
  • Training & Education

    Career Development

    • Professional Development
    • Career Pathways
    • Workforce Trends

    Educational Resources

    • Guidelines & Recommendations
    • App Notes
    • eBooks

    Events

    • Webinars
    • Live Events
  • Events
    • Live Events
    • Webinars
  • Profiles & Community

    People & Profiles

    • Power List
    • Voices in the Community
    • Authors & Contributors
  • Multimedia
    • Video
    • Pathology Captures
Subscribe
Subscribe

False

The Pathologist / Issues / 2025 / November / How Reliable is the Minimally Invasive Autopsy
Forensics Clinical care Research and Innovations

How Reliable is the Minimally Invasive Autopsy?

Researchers assessed the reliability of minimally invasisve tissue sampling for determining cause of death up to 72 hours postmortem

By Kathryn Wighton 11/12/2025 News 2 min read

Share

Minimally invasive tissue sampling (MITS) is a percutaneous sampling technique that collects tissue and fluid specimens for histologic and microbiologic analysis and is used as an alternative to complete diagnostic autopsy, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where autopsy rates are limited by resource, cultural, or logistical constraints.

The study, published in Annals of Diagnostic Pathology, was conducted at Maputo Central Hospital in Mozambique and included nine adults who underwent serial MITS procedures at 24, 48, and 72 hours after death, followed by a complete diagnostic autopsy (CDA). The objective was to compare cause of death (CoD) determinations and assess the effect of postmortem interval on diagnostic performance, histologic integrity, and microbial profiles.

MITS procedures produced CoD determinations consistent with those obtained by CDA across all three postmortem intervals. Immediate and underlying CoDs identified through MITS were concordant with CDA results in eight of nine cases. Histologic assessment showed progressive autolytic changes, particularly in the liver, but the diagnostic features remained interpretable through 72 hours. Bodies were stored at 4 °C between procedures, which limited tissue degradation and allowed comparison of sequential findings within the same cases.

Microbiologic analyses demonstrated a significant increase in bacterial isolates over time, especially among Enterobacteriaceae species (p < .0001). The number of fungal and parasitic detections remained stable, while viral identifications declined with longer postmortem intervals. Aerobic bacterial families decreased after 24 hours, whereas anaerobic or facultative anaerobic bacteria increased. These results indicated that bacterial overgrowth and translocation may occur with longer intervals, and microorganisms detected only after 24 hours should be interpreted carefully when determining CoD. 

In conclusion, MITS was shown to reliably determine CoD when performed with in 72 hours postmortem and could serve as a viable alternative to complete autopsy in resource-limited settings.

Newsletters

Receive the latest pathologist news, personalities, education, and career development – weekly to your inbox.

Newsletter Signup Image

About the Author(s)

Kathryn Wighton

Editor, Conexiant

More Articles by Kathryn Wighton

Explore More in Pathology

Dive deeper into the world of pathology. Explore the latest articles, case studies, expert insights, and groundbreaking research.

False

Advertisement

Recommended

False

Related Content

Event Tracking and Tracing with EMR
Clinical care
Event Tracking and Tracing with EMR

January 7, 2022

1 min read

Can tracking medical events, rather than patients, help us tackle diagnostic error?

2021: A Laboratory Medicine Roundup
Clinical care
2021: A Laboratory Medicine Roundup

January 18, 2022

3 min read

From transgender health care to the power of pathology podcasts, we take a look at our most popular articles of the last year

Not Just a Sample
Clinical care
Not Just a Sample

January 27, 2022

13 min read

Patient–pathologist interactions are vital – and both sides must work together to make the connection

Video: Not Just a Sample
Clinical care
Video: Not Just a Sample

January 28, 2022

1 min read

False

The Pathologist
Subscribe

About

  • About Us
  • Work at Conexiant Europe
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertise With Us
  • Contact Us

Copyright © 2025 Texere Publishing Limited (trading as Conexiant), with registered number 08113419 whose registered office is at Booths No. 1, Booths Park, Chelford Road, Knutsford, England, WA16 8GS.