The Evolution of the Autopsy

Abstract

Contrary to claims that the autopsy has not significantly changed over the past 150 years, this article will demonstrate the remarkable evolution of the autopsy at the hands of its practitioners since the 15th century and into the 21st. A solid understanding of the ongoing evolution of autopsy technique helps provide a firm argument for the continued utilization of the autopsy in daily practice and for the advancement of medicine.

Reviving the Autopsy for Modern Cancer Evolution Research

“…Zenker and Virchow had contrasting approaches to autopsy; where Zenker would remove organs in “blocks” in which the organs were connected to each other, Virchow removed and examined single organs. These two different techniques (and their variations), together with the use of the microscope, provide the foundations upon which the modern day autopsy is built [ 7 , 10 , 11 ]. For a fascinating detailed review of the history of the autopsy, see that authored by Cecchetto et al [ 10 ].…”

“…In present times, the autopsy is a specialized medical examination that encompasses more than just dissection. It includes reviewing medical records, post mortem radiology (X-ray, CT, and MRI), external and internal (dissection) examination, microscopic/histological examination, and ancillary tests (genetics, biochemistry, immunology, microbiology, and toxicology) [ 10 , 11 ]. The autopsy enables the entire body to be examined using multiple modalities (radiology, external inspection, and internal dissection) and allows access to all tissue types, enabling them to be collected for analysis, including those not easily accessible during life.…”

Early history of transylvania medical college: The saga of a disputed autopsy precipitating a duel and grave robbing

“…According to Hansma, “the history of autopsy procedure is regrettably nebulous prior to the 19 th century… even the most famous authors… who relied greatly on autopsy findings to create their celebrated books, did apparently little to document the methods they used (Hansma , p 639).” For instance, Matthew Baillie's classic pathology text The Morbid Anatomy of Some of the Most Important Parts of the Human Body published in 1793 does not contain any text on how to perform an autopsy; Bailie generally begins his description of pathological findings simply with the phrase: “In opening dead bodies … (Baillie ).” However, this book was followed by an atlas beautifully illustrating lesions (Spear et al ).…”

“…Hansma determined that “the first book published in the English language (and in the United States) to contain a chapter on autopsy performance seems to have been Stille's General Pathology of 1848, which included a six‐page description of autopsy method (Hansma , p 639).” This was followed by multiple books starting in the 1870s (Delafield ; Thomas ; Wood ; Virchow ), but clearly no book describing autopsy technique was available when Dudley performed his fateful autopsy of the Irishman in August 1818. Hansma concludes that before Stille “the methods of making a post‐mortem examination were passed on primarily by oral tradition and instruction at the bedside (Hansma , p 639).” Therefore, even as an experienced anatomist, Dudley had no standard autopsy protocol to rely upon. It is entirely understandable how he and Drake might have held strongly differing opinions on the correct way to remove and/or examine a brain.…”