{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,11]],"date-time":"2026-10-11T11:35:41Z","timestamp":1791718541693,"version":"4.3.4"},"reference-count":25,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"6","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2012,5,22]],"date-time":"2012-05-22T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1337644800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Ultrasound in Obstet &amp; Gyne"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2012,6]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Objectives<\/jats:title><jats:p>To compare prospectively maternal acceptance of fetal and neonatal virtuopsy with that of conventional autopsy and to determine the confidence with which magnetic resonance (MR) virtuopsy can be used to diagnose normality\/abnormality of various fetal anatomical structures.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title><jats:p>MR and\/or computed tomography virtuopsy and conventional autopsy were offered to 96 women (102 fetuses\/neonates) following termination of pregnancy (TOP), intrauterine fetal death (IUFD) or neonatal death. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to investigate the effect on maternal acceptance of virtuopsy and\/or conventional autopsy of the age of the mother, gestational age at TOP or delivery after IUFD, order of pregnancy, parity, religion, type of caregiver obtaining consent and reason for death. When parents consented to both MR virtuopsy and conventional autopsy of fetuses \u2265 20 weeks of gestation or neonates, the confidence with which MR virtuopsy could be used to diagnose normality\/abnormality of various anatomical structures was determined on a scale in which conventional autopsy was considered gold standard. On autopsy we classified fetuses\/neonates as having either \u2018normal\u2019 or \u2018abnormal\u2019 anatomical structures; these groups were analyzed separately. At virtuopsy, we indicated confidence of diagnosis of normality\/abnormality of every anatomical structure in each of these two groups defined at autopsy, using a scale from 0 (definitely abnormal) to 100 (definitely normal).<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results<\/jats:title><jats:p>Of the 96 women, 99% (<jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic> = 95) consented to virtuopsy and 61.5% (<jats:italic>n<\/jats:italic> = 59) to both conventional autopsy and virtuopsy; i.e. 36 (37.5%) consented to virtuopsy alone. Maternal acceptance of conventional autopsy was independently positively related to singleton pregnancy, non\u2010Moslem mother, earlier gestation at TOP or delivery afer IUFD and a maternal\u2013fetal medicine specialist obtaining consent. Thirty\u2010three fetuses \u2265 20 weeks of gestation had both conventional autopsy and MR virtuopsy, of which 19 had a full autopsy including the brain. In fetuses with normal anatomical structures at conventional autopsy, MR virtuopsy was associated with high diagnostic confidence (scores &gt; 80) for the brain, skeleton, thoracic organs except the heart, abdominal organs except the pancreas, ureters, bladder and genitals. In fetuses with abnormal anatomical structures at autopsy, MR virtuopsy detected the anomalies with high confidence (scores &lt; 20) for these same anatomical structures. However, in three cases, virtuopsy diagnosed brain anomalies additional to those observed at conventional autopsy.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title><jats:p>MR virtuopsy is accepted by nearly all mothers while conventional autopsy is accepted by about two\u2010thirds of mothers, in whom refusal depends mainly on factors over which we have no control. Although conventional autopsy remains the gold standard, the high acceptance of virtuopsy makes it an acceptable alternative when the former is declined. Copyright \u00a9 2012 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.10079","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2011,9,15]],"date-time":"2011-09-15T13:25:10Z","timestamp":1316093110000},"page":"659-665","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":92,"title":["Acceptance, reliability and confidence of diagnosis of fetal and neonatal virtuopsy compared with conventional autopsy: a prospective study"],"prefix":"10.1002","volume":"39","author":[{"given":"M.","family":"Cannie","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"C.","family":"Votino","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"PH.","family":"Moerman","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"R.","family":"Vanheste","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"V.","family":"Segers","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"K.","family":"Van Berkel","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"M.","family":"Hanssens","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"X.","family":"Kang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"T.","family":"Cos","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"M.","family":"Kir","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"L.","family":"Balepa","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"L.","family":"Divano","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"W.","family":"Foulon","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"J.","family":"De Mey","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"J.","family":"Jani","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2012,5,22]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_5_2_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7196\/SAMJ.3812"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_3_2","volume-title":"Donn\u00e9es p\u00e9rinatales en Walonie\u2010ann\u00e9e 2008","author":"Minsart AF","year":"2010"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_4_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10024-002-0008-y"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_5_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.37939.570104.EE"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_6_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.3869"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_7_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/pd.2534"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_8_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(96)02287-8"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_9_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1046\/j.1471-0528.2003.02076.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2214\/ajr.168.1.8976917"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_11_2","first-page":"22","article-title":"Postmortem MR imaging of the fetal and stillborn central nervous system","volume":"24","author":"Griffiths PD","year":"2003","journal-title":"AJNR Am J Neuroradiol"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_12_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1159\/000048008"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_13_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2350\/07-01-0213.1"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_14_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/uog.3886"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_15_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMp0707996"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_16_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/qshc.2004.011973"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_17_2","first-page":"83","article-title":"The declining autopsy rate and clinicians' attitudes","volume":"69","author":"Loughrey MB","year":"2000","journal-title":"Ulster Med J"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_18_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1006\/exmp.2001.2371"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_19_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.5694\/j.1326-5377.2002.tb04307.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_20_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1148\/rg.265065001"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_21_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(08)61298-2"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_22_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/pd.2447"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_23_2","first-page":"1","volume-title":"Choices and Decisions in Health Care","author":"Abdel Haleem MAS","year":"1993"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_24_2","first-page":"22","article-title":"Postmortem MR imaging of the fetal and stillborn central nervous system","volume":"24","author":"Griffiths PD","year":"2003","journal-title":"Am J Neuroradiol"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_25_2","article-title":"Minimally invasive perinatal autopsies using magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopic postmortem examination (\u201ckeyhole autopsy\u201d): feasibility and initial experience","author":"Sebire NJ","year":"2011","journal-title":"J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med"},{"key":"e_1_2_5_26_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(09)60913-2"}],"container-title":["Ultrasound in Obstetrics &amp; Gynecology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1002%2Fuog.10079","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1002\/uog.10079","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,11,21]],"date-time":"2023-11-21T16:38:31Z","timestamp":1700584711000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1002\/uog.10079"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2012,5,22]]},"references-count":25,"journal-issue":{"issue":"6","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2012,6]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1002\/uog.10079"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/uog.10079","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0960-7692","1469-0705"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0960-7692","type":"print"},{"value":"1469-0705","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2012,5,22]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2011-08-06","order":1,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2012-05-22","order":2,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}