致命肝裂伤的内失血量--根据相对失血量确定致死率。

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, LEGAL
Sandra Holmgren, Torfinn Beer
{"title":"致命肝裂伤的内失血量--根据相对失血量确定致死率。","authors":"Sandra Holmgren, Torfinn Beer","doi":"10.1007/s00414-024-03323-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Certificates of medical evidence are often used to aid the court in assessing the cause and severity of a victim's injuries. In cases with significant blood loss, the question whether the bleeding itself was life-threatening sometimes arises. To answer this, the volume classification of hypovolemic shock described in ATLS<sup>®</sup> is commonly used as an aid, where a relative blood loss > 30% is considered life-threatening. In a recent study of deaths due to internal haemorrhage, many cases had a relative blood loss < 30%. However, many included cases had injuries which could presumably cause deaths via other mechanisms, making the interpretation uncertain. To resolve remaining ambiguity, we studied whether deaths due to isolated liver lacerations had a relative blood loss < 30%, a cause of death where the mechanism of death is presumably exsanguination only. Using the National Board of Forensic Medicine autopsy database, we identified all adult decedents, who had undergone a medico-legal autopsy 2001-2021 (n = 105 952), where liver laceration was registered as the underlying cause of death (n = 102). Cases where death resulted from a combination of also other injuries (n = 79), and cases that had received hospital care, were excluded (n = 4), leaving 19 cases. The proportion of internal haemorrhage to calculated total blood volume in these fatal pure exsanguinations ranged from 12 to 52%, with 63% of cases having a proportion < 30%. Our results lend further support to the claim that the volume classification of hypovolemic shock described in ATLS<sup>®</sup> is inappropriate for assessing the degree of life-threatening haemorrhage in medico-legal cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":14071,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Legal Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Internal blood loss in fatal liver lacerations - determining lethality from relative blood loss.\",\"authors\":\"Sandra Holmgren, Torfinn Beer\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00414-024-03323-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Certificates of medical evidence are often used to aid the court in assessing the cause and severity of a victim's injuries. In cases with significant blood loss, the question whether the bleeding itself was life-threatening sometimes arises. To answer this, the volume classification of hypovolemic shock described in ATLS<sup>®</sup> is commonly used as an aid, where a relative blood loss > 30% is considered life-threatening. In a recent study of deaths due to internal haemorrhage, many cases had a relative blood loss < 30%. However, many included cases had injuries which could presumably cause deaths via other mechanisms, making the interpretation uncertain. To resolve remaining ambiguity, we studied whether deaths due to isolated liver lacerations had a relative blood loss < 30%, a cause of death where the mechanism of death is presumably exsanguination only. Using the National Board of Forensic Medicine autopsy database, we identified all adult decedents, who had undergone a medico-legal autopsy 2001-2021 (n = 105 952), where liver laceration was registered as the underlying cause of death (n = 102). Cases where death resulted from a combination of also other injuries (n = 79), and cases that had received hospital care, were excluded (n = 4), leaving 19 cases. The proportion of internal haemorrhage to calculated total blood volume in these fatal pure exsanguinations ranged from 12 to 52%, with 63% of cases having a proportion < 30%. Our results lend further support to the claim that the volume classification of hypovolemic shock described in ATLS<sup>®</sup> is inappropriate for assessing the degree of life-threatening haemorrhage in medico-legal cases.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Legal Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Legal Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-024-03323-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Legal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-024-03323-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

医疗证据证明通常用于帮助法庭评估受害人受伤的原因和严重程度。在大量失血的案件中,有时会出现出血本身是否危及生命的问题。为了回答这个问题,ATLS® 中描述的低血容量性休克的容量分类通常被用作辅助工具,其中相对失血量大于 30% 被认为是危及生命。在最近一项关于内出血导致死亡的研究中,许多病例的相对失血量 ® 并不适合用于评估医疗法律案件中危及生命的出血程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Internal blood loss in fatal liver lacerations - determining lethality from relative blood loss.

Internal blood loss in fatal liver lacerations - determining lethality from relative blood loss.

Certificates of medical evidence are often used to aid the court in assessing the cause and severity of a victim's injuries. In cases with significant blood loss, the question whether the bleeding itself was life-threatening sometimes arises. To answer this, the volume classification of hypovolemic shock described in ATLS® is commonly used as an aid, where a relative blood loss > 30% is considered life-threatening. In a recent study of deaths due to internal haemorrhage, many cases had a relative blood loss < 30%. However, many included cases had injuries which could presumably cause deaths via other mechanisms, making the interpretation uncertain. To resolve remaining ambiguity, we studied whether deaths due to isolated liver lacerations had a relative blood loss < 30%, a cause of death where the mechanism of death is presumably exsanguination only. Using the National Board of Forensic Medicine autopsy database, we identified all adult decedents, who had undergone a medico-legal autopsy 2001-2021 (n = 105 952), where liver laceration was registered as the underlying cause of death (n = 102). Cases where death resulted from a combination of also other injuries (n = 79), and cases that had received hospital care, were excluded (n = 4), leaving 19 cases. The proportion of internal haemorrhage to calculated total blood volume in these fatal pure exsanguinations ranged from 12 to 52%, with 63% of cases having a proportion < 30%. Our results lend further support to the claim that the volume classification of hypovolemic shock described in ATLS® is inappropriate for assessing the degree of life-threatening haemorrhage in medico-legal cases.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
9.50%
发文量
165
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Legal Medicine aims to improve the scientific resources used in the elucidation of crime and related forensic applications at a high level of evidential proof. The journal offers review articles tracing development in specific areas, with up-to-date analysis; original articles discussing significant recent research results; case reports describing interesting and exceptional examples; population data; letters to the editors; and technical notes, which appear in a section originally created for rapid publication of data in the dynamic field of DNA analysis.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信