Necropsy or Autopsy? It’s All About Communication!

Several of us have decided that communication is more important than tradition. Yes, Virginia, we were all drilled in the discipline of veterinary pathology by traditionalists. We’re stubborn individualists, aren’t we? Greats like John King have necropsied thousands of animals, and we want our procedure to be distinguished from the “other” side—the RDs (well okay, the MDs). The short answer is that “necropsy” literally means “death examination” or examination of death and finds its application in the study of bodies following death. The term is general without reference to species. “Autopsy” literally means “self-examination,” and some of us were taught that the frame of reference for “self” referred to the postmortem examination of “ourselves” or our own species, humans. As such, postmortem examination of nonhumans was proscribed from using the term and was designated “necropsy.” But hold on there a minute, let’s see what Webster has to say. Or as Don Meuten likes to say, “Show me the reference!”

Definition of AUTOPSY

1: an examination of a body after death to determine the cause of death or the character and extent of changes produced by disease —called also necropsy.

2: a critical examination, evaluation, or assessment of someone or something past. ³

Origin of Autopsy. Greek autopsia: the act of seeing with one’s own eyes, from aut- + opsis sight, appearance—more at optic First Known Use: 1678.

The term came into common usage during the 18th-century Age of Enlightenment, when the dissection of humans in the pursuit of knowledge became socially and morally acceptable. The great anatomist Andreas Vesalius pioneered human dissection and overturned a thousand years of Galen’s dogma about human anatomy, much of which was wrong but never exposed until Vesalius “looked for himself,” then published his observations in 1543 in his seminal work De Humani Corporis Fabrica. ² Autopsy for the purpose of correlating clinical disease with changes in anatomy began in earnest with Giovanni Morgagni, who published De Sedibus et Causis Morborum in 1761. The context of the term autopsy, or self-examination, was “to examine for yourself” and shifted its meaning from a passive noun to a purposeful action by an operator performing the examination. Subsequently, autopsy became a fundamental approach to learning about medicine and disease. Indeed, physicians in the Paris school developed the concept that you followed your patients from admission to the hospital all the way to the autopsy room. This concept does not define the purposeful action by the species being examined.

So now you “see” it? It means we’re examining with our own eyes, rather than only drawing conclusions from the body’s external signs as the Greeks and Romans limited themselves to. It has nothing to do with whether it’s a 4-legged animal or a 2-legged animal (or as Bruce Williams likes to say, a poorly haired animal). Not just due to declining hospital revenues, we’ve decided that client communication is important. Submissions for autopsies/necropsies are on the decline at many veterinary colleges. Owners and clinicians are reluctant to have their beloved pet or patient necropsied, and in fact owners are not sure what this refers to. However, owners have heard the word “autopsy” and have a general concept of the word from deceased family or friends as well as nightly on TV. The word “necropsy” is new to most owners, or it may even connote “necrophilia,” a definite negative, at a very emotional time. If clients understand what they’re being asked to grant permission for, they feel more comfortable and are more likely to approve the procedure (and the charges, even though they are not charged directly for a postmortem examination at North Carolina State; but that’s a debate for another time—oh, and by the way, postmortem is 1 word, not 2).

There is anecdotal evidence at some veterinary schools that we obtain permission to do postmortem examinations more frequently when we ask to perform an “autopsy” than when we ask for a “necropsy.” Now that both the AMA and AVMA have embraced the One Medicine concept, the time is right to reinforce the universality of medicine and further unite veterinary and human medicine. ¹ We can do this by adopting a term more familiar and respected by the public. We can elevate the postmortem examination of animals to a process on par with human medicine and perhaps increase the idea of the importance of this to further our understanding of animal disease. The natural course of many diseases, especially neoplastic diseases in companion animals, is poorly understood because the animals are often euthanized but not autopsied. In addition we can eliminate any suggestion of second-class citizenship that may demean postmortem examination of animals by veterinarians by referring to the process that is equal to what human pathologists do.

Autopsy?! Such heresy! But we propose to set dogma and tradition aside for the sake of better communication and perhaps an increase in cases. In addition, we have already begun to change the word and the way we do business at North Carolina State and The Ohio State. Are we communicating?