Abstract

The outset of the year 2020 witnessed the outbreak of an epidemic known as CoVid-19 or novel coronavirus pandemic. Since then, the number of confirmed cases of this infection had increased rapidly all over the world. Autopsy provides relevant knowledge about the identification and determination of the cause of death in forensic medicine. Different non-invasive and minimally invasive approaches over the traditional autopsy are introduced into forensic science to deal with challenges presented by CoVid-19 pandemic where performing invasive autopsy is not feasible. Virtopsy is a multi-disciplinary science. ‘Virtopsy’ or Virtual Autopsy aims at new imaging techniques in forensic pathology to facilitate the present postmortem examination. It offers advantages over invasive ‘body opening’ autopsy. Virtopsy consists of body volume documentation, optical scanning with imaging techniques such as Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT) scan coupled with minimally invasive approaches such as postmortem biopsies. The importance of Virtopsy is noteworthy in post mortem examination of CoVid-19 patients. Virtopsy has a broad spectrum of uses in forensic medicine, forensic odontology, firearm injury and road traffic injury etc. Hence, it can be used either independently or as an alternative to conventional autopsy. The present study highlights the importance of Virtopsy in postmortem examination and its contribution in forensic science. It also provides scope for future research in the subdisciplines of forensic science.

• 1.   Maiese A, Manetti AC, La Russa R, Di Paolo M, Turillazzi E, Frati P, et al. Autopsy findings in COVID-19-related deaths: a literature review. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2020;16(4):1-18.
• 2.   Elsoukkary SS, Mostyka M, Dimsdale A, Cook T, Delaney K, Soffing M, et al. Autopsy findings in 32 patients with COVID-19: a single-institution experience. Pathobiology. 2021;88(1):56-68.
• 3.   Eketunde AO, Mellacheruvu SP, Oreoluwa P. Review of postmortem findings in patients with COVID-19. Cureus. 2020;12(7):e9438.
• 4.   World Health Organization. India: WHO coronavirus disease (COVID-19) dashboard with vaccination data [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; [cited 2021 Apr 14]. Available from: https://covid19.who.int/region/searo/country/in
• 5.   Buja LM, Barth RF, Krueger GR, Brodsky SV, Hunter RL. The importance of the autopsy in medicine: perspectives of pathology colleagues. Acad Pathol. 2019;6:2374289519834041.
• 6.   van den Tweel JG, Wittekind C. The rise and fall of the autopsy. Virchows Arch. 2013;462(4):371-80.
• 7.   Sakhawat V, Green A, Waite K, Beckwith H, More B, Roberts I. COVID-19 autopsies: conclusions from international studies. Diagn Histopathol. 2021;27(3):103-7.
• 8.   Perju-Dumbrava D, Chiroban O. Virtopsy - an alternative to the conventional autopsy. Rom J Leg Med. 2010;18(1):75-8.
• 9.   Virtopsy-a moral boon in forensics [Internet]. [cited 2021 Apr 14]. Available from: https://example-source-link.com (Note: Source appeared incomplete in input).
• 10.   Bolliger SA, Thali MJ. Imaging and virtual autopsy: looking back and forward. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2015;370(1674):20140253.
• 11.   Wagensveld IM, Myriam Hunink MG, Oei EHG, Blokker BM, Weustink AC. Hospital implementation of minimally invasive autopsy: a prospective cohort study of clinical performance and costs. PLoS One. 2019;14(7):e0219291.
• 12.   Ebert LC, Ptacek W, Naether S, Furst M, Ross S, Buck U, et al. Virtobot - a multi-functional robotic system for 3D surface scanning and automatic post mortem biopsy. Int J Med Robot. 2010;6(1):18-27.
• 13.   Pomara C, Fineschi V, Scalzo G, Guglielmi G. Virtopsy versus digital autopsy: virtuous autopsy. Radiol Med. 2009;114(8):1367-82.
• 14.   Editorial. Indian Journal of Forensic Medicine & Toxicology [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2021 Apr 14];39(1). Available from: https://www.indianjournals.com/ijor.aspx?target=ijor:jiafm&volume=39&issue=1&article=editorial
• 15.   Science Education Resource Center at Carleton College. X-ray computed tomography (CT) [Internet]. Northfield (MN): Carleton College; [cited 2021 Apr 14]. Available from: https://serc.carleton.edu/research_education/geochemsheets/techniques/CT.html
• 16.   Berger A. Magnetic resonance imaging. BMJ. 2002;324(7328):35.
• 17.   European Coordination Committee of the Radiological, Electromedical and Healthcare IT Industry (COCIR). Medical imaging [Internet]. Brussels: COCIR; [cited 2021 Apr 14]. Available from: https://www.cocir.org/our-industry/medical-imaging.html
• 18.   Ruder TD, Hatch GM, Ebert LC, Flach PM, Ross S, Ampanozi G, et al. Whole body postmortem magnetic resonance angiography. J Forensic Sci. 2012;57(3):778-82.
• 19.   Brüschweiler W, Braun M, Fuchser F, Dirnhofer R, Thali MJ. Analysis of patterned injuries and injury-causing instruments with forensic 3D/CAD supported photogrammetry (FPHG): an instruction manual for the documentation process. Forensic Sci Int. 2003;132(2):130-8.
• 20.   Schweitzer W, Häusler M, Bär W, Thali MJ. Evaluation of 3D surface scanners for skin documentation in forensic medicine: comparison of benchmark surfaces. BMC Med Imaging. 2007;7:1.
• 21.   Fahrni S, Campana L, Potin M, Dominguez A, Castella V, Grabherr S. CT-scan vs. 3D surface scanning of a skull: first considerations regarding reproducibility issues. Forensic Sci Res. 2017;2(2):93-9.
• 22.   Leipner A, Baumeister R, Thali M, Ebert L. Multi-camera system for 3D forensic documentation. Forensic Sci Int. 2016;261:123-8.
• 23.   Castillo P, Ussene E, Ismail MR, Jordao D, Lovane L, Carrilho C, et al. Pathological methods applied to the investigation of causes of death in developing countries: minimally invasive autopsy approach. PLoS One. 2015;10(6):e0132429.
• 24.   Weustink AC, Hunink MG, van Dijke CF, Renken NS, Krestin GP, Oosterhuis JW. Minimally invasive autopsy: an alternative to conventional autopsy? Radiology. 2009;250(3):897-904.
• 25.   Urbanová P, Hejna P, Jurda M. Testing photogrammetry-based techniques for three-dimensional surface documentation in forensic pathology. Forensic Sci Int. 2015;250:77-86.
• 26.   Gitto L, Donato L, di Luca A, Serinelli S. The application of photogrammetry in the autopsy room: a basic, practical workflow. J Forensic Sci. 2020;65(6):2146-54.
• 27.   Flies MJ, Larsen PK, Klein A, Hansen RG, Hansen K, Vesterby A, et al. Forensic 3D documentation of skin injuries using photogrammetry: photographs vs video and manual vs automatic measurements. Int J Legal Med. 2019;133(3):963-71.
• 28.   Naether S, Buck U, Thali M, Breitbeck R. The examination and identification of bite marks in foods using 3D scanning and 3D comparison methods. Int J Legal Med. 2012;126(1):89-95.
• 29.   Buck U, Naether S, Braun M, Bolliger S, Friederich H, Jackowski C, et al. Application of 3D documentation and geometric reconstruction methods in traffic accident analysis: with high resolution surface scanning, radiological MSCT/MRI scanning and real data based animation. Forensic Sci Int. 2007;170(1):20-8.
• 30.   Peschel O, Szeimies U, Vollmar C, Praun M. 3-D reconstruction of skull gunshot injuries. Forensic Sci Int. 2013;233(1-3):45-50.
• 31.   Jalalzadeh H, Giannakopoulos GF, Berger FH, Fronczek J, van de Goot FR, Reijnders UJ, et al. Post-mortem imaging compared with autopsy in trauma victims - a systematic review. Forensic Sci Int. 2015;257:29-48.
• 32.   Puranik R, Gray B, Lackey H, Yeates L, Parker G, Duflou J, et al. Comparison of conventional autopsy and magnetic resonance imaging in determining the cause of sudden death in the young. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2014;16:44.
• 33.   Shruthi M, Gupta N, Jana M, Mridha AR, Kumar A, Agarwal R, et al. Conventional vs virtual autopsy with postmortem MRI in phenotypic characterization of stillbirths and fetal malformations. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;51(2):236-45.
• 34.   Roberts IS, Benamore RE, Benbow EW, Lee SH, Harris JN, Jackson A, et al. Post-mortem imaging as an alternative to autopsy in the diagnosis of adult deaths: a validation study. Lancet. 2012;379(9811):136-42.
• 35.   Tschui J, Jackowski C, Schwendener N. Post-mortem CT and MR brain imaging of putrefied corpses. Int J Legal Med. 2016;130(4):1061-8.
• 36.   Lacy JM, Brooks EG, Akers J, Armstrong D, Decker L, Gonzalez A, et al. COVID-19: postmortem diagnostic and biosafety considerations. Am J Forensic Med Pathol. 2020;41(3):143-51.
• 37.   Weustink AC, Hunink MG, van Dijke CF, Renken NS, Krestin GP, Oosterhuis JW. Minimally invasive autopsy: an alternative to conventional autopsy? Radiology. 2009;250(3):897-904.
• 38.   Duarte-Neto AN, Monteiro RA, da Silva LF, Malheiros DM, de Oliveira EP, Theodoro-Filho J, et al. Pulmonary and systemic involvement in COVID-19 patients assessed with ultrasound-guided minimally invasive autopsy. Histopathology. 2020;77(2):186-97.
• 39.   Blokker BM, Weustink AC, Wagensveld IM, von der Thüsen JH, Pezzato A, D'Souza AF, et al. Conventional autopsy versus minimally invasive autopsy with postmortem MRI, CT, and CT-guided biopsy: comparison of diagnostic performance. Radiology. 2018;289(3):658-67.
• 40.   Fan JK, Tong DK, Poon JT, Lo OS, Beh PS, Patil NG, et al. Multimodality minimally invasive autopsy-a feasible and accurate approach to post-mortem examination. Forensic Sci Int. 2010;195(1-3):93-8.
• 41.   Castillo P, Martínez MJ, Ussene E, Jordao D, Lovane L, Ismail MR, et al. Validity of a minimally invasive autopsy for cause of death determination in adults in Mozambique: an observational study. PLoS Med. 2016;13(11):e1002171.
• 42.   Duarte-Neto AN, Monteiro RA, Johnsson J, Cunha MP, Pour SZ, Saraiva G, et al. Ultrasound-guided minimally invasive autopsy as a tool for rapid post-mortem diagnosis in the 2018 Sao Paulo yellow fever epidemic: correlation with conventional autopsy. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2019;13(7):e0007625.
• 43.   Brook OR, Piper KG, Mercado NB, Siewe Y, Siewe F, Mamlouk MD. Feasibility and safety of ultrasound-guided minimally invasive autopsy in COVID-19 patients. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2021;46(3):1263-71.
• 44.   Monteiro RA, Duarte-Neto AN, Silva LF, Oliveira EP, Filho JT, Santos GA, et al. Ultrasound-guided minimally invasive autopsies: a protocol for the study of pulmonary and systemic involvement of COVID-19. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2020;75:e1972.
• 45.   Malizia A, Filograna L, Capparelli E, Gelfusa M, Poggi LA, Ciano S, et al. Post-mortem investigation through virtual autopsy techniques: proposal of a new diagnostic approach to reduce the risks of operators during emergencies. Int J Saf Secur Eng. 2020;10(4):535-41.
• 46.   Boyd KL, Villa C, Lynnerup N. The use of CT scans in estimating age at death by examining the extent of ectocranial suture closure. J Forensic Sci. 2015;60(2):363-9.
• 47.   Thali MJ, Yen K, Plattner T, Ozdoba C, Vock P. Charred body: virtual autopsy with multi-slice computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. J Forensic Sci. 2002;47(6):1326-31.
• 48.   Badam RK, Sownetha T, Babu S. Virtopsy: touch-free autopsy. J Forensic Dent Sci. 2017;9(1):42.
• 49.   do Rosário AF, Souza PHC, Paiva LAS, et al. Virtual autopsy in forensic sciences and its applications in the forensic odontology. Rev Odonto Cienc. 2012;27(1):5-9.
• 50.   Thali MJ, Markwalder T, Jackowski C, Sonnenschein M, Dirnhofer R. Dental CT imaging as a screening tool for dental profiling: advantages and limitations. J Forensic Sci. 2006;51(1):113-9.
• 51.   Jackowski C, Aghayev E, Thali MJ. Maximum intensity projection of cranial computed tomography data for dental identification. Int J Legal Med. 2006;120(3):165-7.
• 52.   Dirnhofer R, Jackowski C, Vock P, Potter K, Thali MJ. Virtopsy: minimally invasive, imaging-guided virtual autopsy. Radiographics. 2006;26(5):1305-33.
• 53.   Jeffery AJ, Rutty GN, Robinson C, Morgan B. Computed tomography of projectile injuries. Clin Radiol. 2008;63(10):1160-6.
• 54.   Andenmatten MA, Thali MJ, Kneubuehl BP, Oestreich J, Ross S, Spendlove D, et al. Gunshot injuries detected by post-mortem multislice computed tomography (MSCT): a feasibility study. Legal Med. 2008;10(6):287-92.
• 55.   Raneri D. Enhancing forensic investigation through the use of modern three-dimensional (3D) imaging technologies for crime scene reconstruction. Aust J Forensic Sci. 2018;50(6):697-707.
• 56.   Grabherr S, Baumann P. Post-mortem imaging in forensic investigations: current utility, limitations, and ongoing developments. Res Rep Forensic Med Sci. 2016;6:25-37.
• 57.   Blokker BM, Wagensveld IM, Weustink AC, Oosterhuis JW, Hunink MG. Non-invasive or minimally invasive autopsy compared to conventional autopsy of suspected natural deaths in adults: a systematic review. Eur Radiol. 2016;26(4):1159-79.
• 58.   Fais P, Giraudo C, Viero A, Miotto D, Viel G, Montisci M, et al. Micro computed tomography features of laryngeal fractures in a case of fatal manual strangulation. Legal Med. 2016;18:85-9.
• 59.   Yen K, Thali MJ, Aghayev E, Jackowski C, Schweitzer W, Boesch C, et al. Strangulation signs: initial correlation of MRI, MSCT, and forensic neck findings. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2005;22(4):501-10.
• 60.   Jackowski C, Schweitzer W, Thali M, Yen K, Aghayev E, Sonnenschein M, et al. Virtopsy: postmortem imaging of the human heart in situ using MSCT and MRI. Forensic Sci Int. 2005;149(1):11-23.
• 61.   Jackowski C, Warntjes MJ, Christe A, Oestreich J, Endt P, Boesch C, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging goes postmortem: noninvasive detection and assessment of myocardial infarction by postmortem MRI. Eur Radiol. 2011;21(1):70-8.
• 62.   Postmortem computed tomography for diagnosis of cause of death in male prisoners [Internet]. [cited 2021 Apr 14]. Available from: https://example-source.com (Note: Source appeared incomplete in input).
• 63.   Shiotani S, Kohno M, Ohashi N, Atake S, Yamazaki K, Nakayama H. Non-traumatic postmortem computed tomographic (PMCT) findings of the lung. Forensic Sci Int. 2004;139(1):39-48.
• 64.   Yen K, Lövblad KO, Scheurer E, Ozdoba C, Thali MJ, Aghayev E, et al. Post-mortem forensic neuroimaging: correlation of MSCT and MRI findings with autopsy results. Forensic Sci Int. 2007;173(1):21-35.
• 65.   Thali MJ, Jackowski C, Oestreich J, Ross S, Dirnhofer R. VIRTOPSY - the Swiss virtual autopsy approach. Legal Med. 2007;9(2):100-4.
• 66.   Kottner S, Ebert LC, Ampanozi G, Franckenberg S, Sieberth T. VirtoScan - a mobile, low-cost photogrammetry setup for fast post-mortem 3D full-body documentations in x-ray computed tomography and autopsy suites. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2017;13(1):34-43.
• 67.   Breitbeck R, Ptacek W, et al. Virtobot - a robot system for optical 3D scanning in forensic medicine. In: Thali MJ, editor. The Virtopsy Approach. Zurich: Hometrica Consulting; 2013. p. 84-91.
• 68.   Aggarwal K, Chauhan A, Chavali KH. Implementation of virtual autopsy in forensic medicine. Indian J Forensic Med Toxicol. 2019;13(2):68-72.
• 69.   Decker SJ, Braileanu M, Weaver A, Nieroda M, Sanks J, Li G. Forensic radiology: a primer. Acad Radiol. 2019;26(6):820-30.
• 70.   Kanchan T, Saraf A, Krishan K, Gupta A. The advantages of virtopsy during the Covid-19 pandemic. Med Leg J. 2020;88(1):55-6.
• 71.   Singal K. History and modalities of forensic radiology. Indian J Forensic Med Pathol. 2015;8(4):135-8.
• 72.   Grabherr S, Egger C, Vilarino R, Campana L, Jotterand M, Dedouit F. Modern post-mortem imaging: an update on recent developments. Forensic Sci Res. 2017;2(2):52-64.
• 73.   Sebire NJ. Towards the minimally invasive autopsy? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2006;28(7):865-7.
• 74.   D’Onofrio V, Donders E, Vanden Broeck B, et al. The clinical value of minimal invasive autopsy in COVID-19 patients. PLoS One. 2020;15(11):e0242300.
• 75.   Yucong W, Haibiao Z, Min Z, Liqiang W. Application of virtopsy in forensic pathology. J Forensic Sci Med. 2021;7(1):14.