Key result
Broader sequencing yields ~36% higher diagnostic rate than restricted panels in unexplained sudden death.
Why the study?
Reported diagnostic yield of molecular autopsy in unexplained sudden death varies across sequencing eras, cohort types, and variant-classification frameworks.
Does broader sequencing in molecular autopsy improve diagnostic yield compared to restricted panels in unexplained sudden death?
Meta-Analysis (n=4,041)
Does broader sequencing in molecular autopsy improve diagnostic yield compared to restricted panels in unexplained sudden death?
Odds Ratio: 1.36 (95% CI 1.09–1.7)
p-value: p=0.006
Contemporary ACMG-compatible molecular autopsy provides a ~13% diagnostic yield in unexplained sudden death, demonstrating value for family-based cascade screening and risk stratification despite an increased VUS burden with broader sequencing.
BACKGROUND: Molecular autopsy is increasingly used in unexplained sudden death, but reported diagnostic yield varies across sequencing eras, cohort types, and variant-classification frameworks. This review evaluated ACMG-corrected diagnostic yield, genomic architecture, VUS burden, and downstream family translation. METHODS: This PRISMA-based systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251082728). Studies reporting postmortem genetic testing in sudden unexplained death were included. Quantitative diagnostic-yield synthesis included 44 core molecular autopsy studies comprising 4,041 index cases; 35 studies contributed family-translation data. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed, and subgroup analyses were conducted by sequencing strategy and age group. RESULTS: The pooled ACMG-corrected diagnostic yield was approximately 13%, with substantial heterogeneity. Broader sequencing approaches showed modestly higher yield than candidate/restricted panels (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.09-1.70; p = 0.006), but with greater VUS burden. Young adult/adult cohorts showed the highest pooled yield, while infant/pediatric cohorts demonstrated broader multisystem genomic architecture and higher VUS burden. Recurrent substrates included RYR2, SCN5A, KCNQ1, KCNH2, TTN, and MYBPC3. Family-translation data were available from 35 studies, including 25 overlapping index-case cohorts; genotype-positive relatives, phenotype-positive relatives, segregation analysis, and clinically actionable interventions were frequently reported. CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary ACMG-compatible molecular autopsy provides modest but clinically meaningful diagnostic yield. Its major value extends beyond postmortem diagnosis, supporting family-based preventive genomic medicine through cascade screening, phenotype correlation, and targeted risk stratification.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Singh et al. (2026) conducted a meta-analysis in Unexplained sudden death (n=4,041). Broader sequencing approaches (molecular autopsy) vs. Candidate/restricted panels was evaluated on ACMG-corrected diagnostic yield (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.09-1.70, p=0.006). In cases of unexplained sudden death, broader sequencing approaches for molecular autopsy provided a higher diagnostic yield than restricted panels (OR 1.36; 95% CI 1.09-1.70; p=0.006).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: