Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article.

Postmortem studies, including the complete diagnostic autopsy (CDA) and the minimally invasive autopsy (MIA), an innovative approach to post-mortem sampling and cause of death investigation, are commonly performed within 24 hours after death because the quality of the tissues deteriorates over time. This short timeframe may hamper the feasibility of the procedure. In this study, we compared the diagnostic performance of the two postmortem procedures when carried out earlier and later than 24 hours after death, as well as the impact of increasing postmortem intervals (PMIs) on the results of the microbiological tests in a series of 282 coupled MIA/CDA procedures performed at the Maputo Central Hospital in Mozambique between 2013 and 2015. 214 procedures were conducted within 24 hours of death (early autopsies), and 68 after 24 hours of death (late autopsies). No significant differences were observed in the number of non-conclusive diagnoses (2/214 [1%] vs. 1/68 [1%] p = 0.5645 for the CDA; 27/214 [13%] vs. 5/68 [7%] p = 0.2332 for the MIA). However, increasing PMIs were associated with a raise in the number of bacteria identified (rate: 1.014 per hour [95%CI: 1.002–1.026]; p = 0.0228). This increase was mainly due to rising numbers of bacteria of the Enterobacteriaceae family and Pseudomonas genus strains. Thus, performing MIA or CDA more than 24 hours after death can still render reliable diagnostic results, not only for non-infectious conditions but also for many infectious diseases, although, the contribution of Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas spp. as etiological agents of infections leading to death may be overestimated.

Background Clinico-pathological discrepancies are more frequent in settings in which limited diagnostic techniques are available, but there is little information on their actual impact. Aim We assessed the accuracy of the clinical diagnoses in a tertiary referral hospital in sub-Saharan Africa by comparison with post-mortem findings. We also identified potential risk factors for misdiagnoses. Methods One hundred and twelve complete autopsy procedures were performed at the Maputo Central Hospital (Mozambique), from November 2013 to March 2015. We reviewed the clinical records. Major clinico-pathological discrepancies were assessed using a modified version of the Goldman and Battle classification. Results Major diagnostic discrepancies were detected in 65/112 cases (58%) and were particularly frequent in infection-related deaths (56/80 [70%] major discrepancies). The sensitivity of the clinical diagnosis for toxoplasmosis was 0% (95% CI: 0–37), 18% (95% CI: 2–52) for invasive fungal infections, 25% (95% CI: 5–57) for bacterial sepsis, 34% (95% CI: 16–57), for tuberculosis, and 46% (95% CI: 19–75) for bacterial pneumonia. Major discrepancies were more frequent in HIV-positive than in HIV-negative patients (48/73 [66%] vs. 17/39 [44%]; p = 0.0236). Conclusions Major clinico-pathological discrepancies are still frequent in resource constrained settings. Increasing the level of suspicion for infectious diseases and expanding the availability of diagnostic tests could significantly improve the recognition of common life-threatening infections, and thereby reduce the mortality associated with these diseases. The high frequency of clinico-pathological discrepancies questions the validity of mortality reports based on clinical data or verbal autopsy.