Responses

Download PDFPDF

Long QT syndrome and sudden unexpected infant death
Free
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Regarding post-mortem genetic testing
    • Neil Langlois, Forensic Pathologist Forensic Science SA & University of Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
    • Other Contributors:
      • Sarah Parsons, Forensic Pathologist

    We found the paper ‘Long QT syndrome and sudden unexpected infant death’ by Van Niekerk and colleagues to be comprehensive and interesting. We would like to point out that there appears to be a misunderstanding as the authors state that in Australia and New Zealand all sudden and unexpected deaths are mandated to undergo targeted post-mortem genetic testing. Guidelines published by TRAGADY (Trans-Tasman Response AGAinst sudden Death in the Young) advocate that material suitable for DNA extraction must be obtained as part of the best practice guidelines for investigation of sudden death of a young person (1). However, subsequent genetic analysis is not mandated. A policy on the genetic investigation of cause of death in coronial autopsy cases has been recently released by the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia (RCPA) (2). It is likely this policy document was not available at the time Van Niekerk and colleagues were writing their paper. The RPCA policy states that genetic testing of the deceased is not endorsed in the absence of engagement of the family of the deceased with a genetic counselling service and confirmation of a family history compatible with a heritable disorder. Ideally, there should be identification in the living relatives of a putative genetic defect (or defects) or phenotype for which testing is available. For a number of reasons, some of which are outlined in the RCPA policy document, mandatory post-mortem genetic testing may not be benefic...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.