| Title |
Differentiation at autopsy between in vivo gas embolism and putrefaction using gas composition analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Legal Medicine, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00414-012-0783-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yara Bernaldo de Quirós, Oscar González-Díaz, Andreas Møllerløkken, Alf O. Brubakk, Astrid Hjelde, Pedro Saavedra, Antonio Fernández |
| Abstract |
Gas embolism can arise from different causes (iatrogenic accidents, criminal interventions, or diving related accidents). Gas analyses have been shown to be a valid technique to differentiate between putrefaction gases and gas embolism. In this study, we performed systematic necropsies at different postmortem times in three experimental New Zealand White Rabbits models: control or putrefaction, infused air embolism, and compression/decompression. The purpose of this study was to look for qualitative and quantitative differences among groups and to observe how putrefaction gases mask in vivo gas embolism. We found that the infused air embolism and compression/decompression models had a similar gas composition prior to 27-h postmortem, being typically composed of around 70-80 % of N(2) and 20-30 % of CO(2), although unexpected higher CO(2) concentrations were found in some decompressed animals, putting in question the role of CO(2) in decompression. All these samples were statistically and significantly different from more decomposed samples. Gas composition of samples from more decomposed animals and from the putrefaction model presented hydrogen, which was therefore considered as a putrefaction marker. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 40 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 15% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Professor | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 24% |
| Unknown | 10 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 37% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 5 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 January 2023.
All research outputs
#3,339,375
of 23,575,882 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#138
of 2,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,476
of 185,150 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,575,882 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,126 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 185,150 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.