Ramazan AKÇAN, Aykut LALE, Ali Rıza TÜMER, Eyup Ruşen HEYBET, Aysun Balseven ODABAŞI

Iskeletleşmiş Cesetlerde Postmortem Interval Tayini

Postmortem interval [PMI] cinayetler başta olmak üzere adliolayların açıklığa kavuşturulması için tespit edilmesi gerekenönemli bir parametredir. Özellikle cesetler iskeletleştiğinde budurum daha da zorlaşmaktadır. Iskeletleşmiş cesetlerde bulunanparçaların adli olarak değerlendirilmesinin gerekli olupolmadığı hususu PMI tayini ile aydınlatılabilmektedir. Bulunanparçaların adli antropolojik değerlendirilmesi ile anlamlıveriler elde edilebildiği bilinmektedir. Bunun için morfolojik,fizyokimyasal ve serolojik, radyoizotop analizleri ile çevreseldeğişkenlerin incelenmesi ile yapılan çalışmalar sonucundaPMI tayini gerçekleştirilebilmektedir. Yazımızda iskeletleşmişparçalarda PMI tayini önemine ve bunun için kullanılan yöntemlereadli tıp uzmanlarının dikkatini çekmeyi amaçladık.

Postmortem Interval in Skeletonized Body

Postmortem interval [PMI] estimation is an important parameterfor forensic purpose. Espically when corpses are skeletonized,PMI estimation is more difficult too. PMI estimation assistthat determination whether the forensic importance of skeletonizedpart. Therefore forensic anthropological evaluationproduce significant data. For estimation of PMI, morphological,physiochemical, serological and radioisotop analysis and alsoexamination of environmental variables can be performed. Weaimed to point that estimation of PMI importance for skeletonizedpart and used methods for estimation of PMI.

PDF

___

1. Jans MM. Microbial bioerosion of bone--a review. In: Wis-- shak M, Tapanila Eds. Current Developments in Bioerosion. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 2008:397--413.
2. Kellerman G, Waterman N, Scharefenberger L. Demon-- stration in vitro of postmortem bacterial transmigration. Am Clin Pathol1976;66[5]:911--5.
3. Bell LS, Skinner MF, Jones SJ. The speed of post mortem change to the human skeleton and its taphonomic signifi-- cance. Forensic Sci Int 1996;82[2]:129--40.
4. Marchiafava V, Bonucci E, Ascenzi A. Fungal osteoclasia: model of dead bone resorption. Calc Tiss Res 1974;14[1]:195-- 210.
5. Hackett C. Microscopical focal destruction [tunnels] in ex-- humed human bones. Med Sci Law 1981;21[4]:243--65.
6. Yoshino M, Kimijima T, Miyasaka S, Sato H, Seta S. Micro-- scopical study on estimation of time since death in skeletal remains. Forensic Sci Int 1991 ;49[2]:143--58.
7. Swift B. The timing of death. In: Rutty GN ed. Essentials of Autopsy Practice. London: Springer--Verlag. 2006:189--214.
8. Knight B. Methods of dating skeletal remains. Med Sci Law 1969;9[4]:247--52.
9. Jarvis DR. Nitrogen levels in long bones from coffin buri-- als interred for periods of 26--90 years. Forensic Sci Int 1997;85[3l:199--208.
10. Knight B, Lauder I. Practical methods of dating skeletal remains: preliminary study. Med Sci Law 1967;7[4]:205--8.
11. Knight B, Lauder |. Methods of dating skeletal remains. Hum Biol1969:322--41.
12. Saukko P, Knight B. Knight's Forensic Pathology. London: Edward Arnold Publishers, 2004.
13. Buchan M, Anderson G. Time since death: review of the current status of methods used in the later postmortem inter-- val. Can Soc Forensic Sci 2001;34[1]:1--22.
14. Hoke N, Grigat A, Grupe G, Harbeck M. Reconsideration of bone postmortem interval estimation by UV--induced autofluo-- rescence. Forensic Sci Int 2013;228[1]:176.e1--e6.
15. Forbes SL. Potential determinants of postmortem and postburial interval of buried remains. In: Tibbet M, Carter DO eds. Soil Analysis in Forensic Taphonomy: Chemical and Bio-- logical Effects of Buried Human Remains, Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2009:225--46.
16. Pollard A. Dating the Time of Death. In: Hunter J, Roberts CA, Martin eds. Studies in Crime: Arı Introduction to Forensic Archaeology. London: BT Batsford Publishers, 1996:139--55.
17. Introna F, Di Vella G, Campobasso CP. Determination of postmortem interval from old skeletal remains by image analysis of luminol test results. Forensic Sci 1999;44:535--8.
Lale A. et al. Postmortem Interval in Skeletonized Body 18. Ramsthaler F, Kreutz K, Zipp K, Verhoff M. Dating skeletal remains with Iuminot--chemiluminescence. Validity, intra--and interobserver error. Forensic Sci Int 2009;187[1]:47--50.
19. Brandt E, Wiechmann |, Grupe G. How reliable are immu-- nological tools for the detection of ancient proteins in fossil bones? Int Osteoarchaeol 2002;12[5]:307--16.
20. Schwarcz HP, Agur K, Jantz LM. new method for deter-- mination of postmortem interval: citrate content of bone*. Forensic Sci 2010;55[6]:1516--22.
21. Taylor R, Suchey J, Payen L, Slota P. The use of radio-- carbon [14C] to identify human skeletal materials of forensic science interest. Forensic Sci 1989;34[5]:1196--205.
22. Cook GT, MacKenzie AB. Radioactive isotope analyses of skeletal materials in forensic science: review of uses and potential uses. Int Legal Med 2014:1--14.
23. Haglund WD. Dogs and coyotes: Postmortem Involvement with Human Remains. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1997: 367--81.
24. Haglund WD, Reay DT, Swindler D. Tooth mark artifacts and survival of bones in animal scavenged human skeletons. Forensic Sci 1988;33[4]:985--97.
25. Morse D, Dailey R. The degree of deterioration of associ-- ated death scene material. Forensic Sci 1985;30:119--27.
26. Cardoso H, Santos A, Dias R, Garcia C, Pinto M, Se'rgio C, Magalhâes T. Establishing minimum postmortem interval of human remains in an advanced state of skeletonization using the growth rate of bryophytes and plant roots. Int Legal Med 2010;124[5]:451--6.