Authors
Nilanjana Roy
Abstract
In cases of both natural and man-made mass disaster scenarios present profound challenges for the dignified, accurate identification of victims. Traditional means of identification may be slow, invasive, and hampered by the fragmented or commingled nature of remains. This paper highlights the critical and expanding role that forensic radiology plays as an indispensable tool in the modern DVI process. Forensic radiology, by employing modalities such as PMCT and PMMRI, offers a non-invasive, rapid, highly detailed method for documentation and analysis of human remains. The application of radiology in DVI is multifaceted. First and foremost, it is a potent tool for primary identification by comparing post-mortem radiographs against ante-mortem medical records, especially dental radiographs and unique skeletal features. It is also instrumental in disaster triage, enabling the virtual sorting and reconciliation of commingled remains. Radiology allows the documentation of identifying characteristics such as healed fractures, surgical implants, and unique anatomic variations. Beyond identification, it provides vital data for determining cause and manner of death through the visualization of traumatic injury, foreign objects, and disease pathologies while providing protection to the DVI personnel with the detection of hazardous materials embedded within the remains. In conclusion, the integration of forensic radiology into the standard DVI protocol is very important in increasing the efficiency, accuracy, and safety of the identification process. It does not only quicken victim repatriation with the creation of a permanent, objective, and detailed record, but it also maintains dignity in human identification amidst mass fatality incidents. Further development and standardization of the process are essential for the future in disaster response.
In any fatality case, regardless of the cause or number of victims, identifying the victims is crucial for both humanitarian and legal reasons (Brough et al., 2015). Everyone has the right to be recognized after death and to be returned to their families for a respectful burial. This principle is accepted in all cultures and legal systems. Besides the emotional importance for the victims' families, identification is also vital for legal purposes. Without identifying the victims, we cannot issue death certificates, settle estates, or start criminal procedures (Prokopowicz & Borowska-Solonynko, 2025).
Mass fatality incidents (MFIs) can result from environmental disasters (like earthquakes, tsunamis, or wildfires), transportation accidents (such as plane crashes or train derailments), industrial events (like explosions or structural collapses), or acts of terrorism. These incidents often lead to many victims who die suddenly, presenting unique challenges for identification teams (Santunione et al., 2026). MFIs can be categorized into two types:
• Closed incidents: The victims' identities are known from records like passenger lists.
• Open incidents: The identity and number of victims are initially unclear (as seen in the 2004 Asian tsunami and public terrorist attacks).
The complexity of identifying victims varies significantly based on several factors. These include the number of victims, how badly the human remains are fragmented, whether there was thermal damage from fires, how much decay occurs during recovery, and the availability of ante-mortem material for comparison (Brough et al., 2015).
Traditional identification methods like visual identification by family members, fingerprint analysis, dental analysis, and DNA testing can encounter problems when remains are fragmented, burned, decomposed, or mixed (Hofman et al., 2019). Visual identification is not only unreliable but also very distressing for survivors. Fingerprint analysis works only if the skin is intact. Dental analysis is dependable only if there are enough remains and thorough ante-mortem records. DNA analysis is often the best option, but it takes time and is expensive. The first use of radiography for identification occurred in 1927 when Culbert and Law compared ante-mortem and post-mortem radiographs in a homicide case (Prokopowicz & Borowska-Solonynko, 2025). The application of radiography in mass fatality cases began in 1949 after the Noronic disaster (Rainio et al., 2001). Over the last century, conventional radiography has gained popularity in forensic pathology.
Recently, post-mortem computed tomography (PMCT) has emerged as a new technology for disaster victim identification (DVI). PMCT offers various advantages over conventional radiography, including faster processes, fewer personnel requirements, three-dimensional images, and the ability to review images after years (Sidler et al., 2007).
This paper looks at the growing role of forensic radiology in identifying victims of mass disasters. It explores its historical development, current applications in various fields, documented benefits and drawbacks, and potential future directions within the multidisciplinary DVI framework. By reviewing evidence from peer-reviewed studies and documented disaster responses, this paper demonstrates how forensic radiology has significantly evolved to become a key component of modern disaster victim identification.
References
Brough, Alison L., et al. "Postmortem computed tomography (PMCT) and disaster victim identification." La Radiologia Medica, vol. 120, no. 9, 2015, pp. 866-873.
Brough, Alison L., et al. "The basics of disaster victim identification." Journal of Forensic Radiology and Imaging, vol. 3, no. 1, 2015, pp. 29-37.
Chatzaraki, Viktoria, et al. "Cardiac conduction devices for radiological identification in DVI: an explorative approach." International Journal of Legal Medicine, vol. 134, no. 5, 2020, pp. 1797-1804.
Culbert, W. L., and F. M. Law. "Identification by comparison of roentgenograms: of nasal accessory sinuses and mastoid processes." Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 88, no. 21, 1927, pp. 1634-1636.
Decker, Sebastian, et al. "Virtual anthropological identification using lumbar vertebrae: A proof of concept." Forensic Science International, vol. 285, 2018, pp. 188-193.
Engel, I., et al. "Insights from the 7th of October massacre: Forensic odontology in mass disasters." Forensic Science International, vol. 368, 2025, 112394.
Hofman, Paul, et al. "Use of post-mortem computed tomography in disaster victim identification. Updated positional statement of the members of the disaster victim identification working group of the International Society of Forensic Radiology and Imaging." Journal of Forensic Radiology and Imaging, vol. 19, 2019, 100346.
Martrille, Laurent, et al. "Use of bone disease for personal identification: A case report." Forensic Science International, vol. 301, 2019, pp. e1-e5.
Matsunobu, Yoshiaki, et al. "The utility of chest CT in disaster victim identification: A case report." Forensic Imaging, vol. 22, 2020, 200390.
O'Donnell, Chris, et al. "Contribution of postmortem multidetector CT scanning to identification of the deceased in a mass disaster: Experience gained from the 2009 Victorian bushfires." Forensic Science International, vol. 205, no. 1-3, 2011, pp. 15-28.
Prokopowicz, Violetta, and Anna Borowska-Solonynko. "The current state of using post-mortem computed tomography for personal identification beyond odontology – A systematic literature review." Forensic Science International, vol. 367, 2025, 112377.
Rainio, Juha, et al. "Radiology in forensic expert team operations." Legal Medicine, vol. 3, no. 1, 2001, pp. 34-43.
Ruder, Thomas D., et al. "Radiologic identification of disaster victims: A simple and reliable method using CT of the paranasal sinuses." European Journal of Radiology, vol. 81, no. 2, 2012, pp. e132-e138.
Rutty, Guy N., et al. "The use of post-mortem computed tomography in the disaster victim identification process: The UK DVI experience." Forensic Science International, vol. 305, 2019, 110004.
Rutty, Guy N., et al. "Remote post-mortem radiology reporting in disaster victim identification: Experience gained from the 2017 Grenfell Tower disaster." Forensic Science International, vol. 310, 2020, 110235.
Santunione, Anna Laura, et al. "Forensic imaging in mass disasters: Results of the use of post-mortem computed tomography in earthquake victims." Forensic Imaging, vol. 44, 2026, (in press).
Sidler, Mirjam, et al. "Use of multislice computed tomography in disaster victim identification Advantages and limitations." Forensic Science International, vol. 169, no. 2-3, 2007, pp. 118-128.
Singleton, A. C. "The roentgenological identification of victims of the Noronic disaster." American Journal of Roentgenology and Radium Therapy, vol. 66, no. 3, 1951, pp. 375-382.
Auffret, M., et al. "Sphenoid sinus identification by CT: A comparative study." Journal of Forensic Radiology and Imaging, vol. 7, 2016, pp. 12-17.
Brun, C., et al. "Paranasal sinuses identification: A systematic review." Forensic Science International, vol. 277, 2017, pp. 179-187.
De Angelis, D., et al. "Skeletal idiopathic osteosclerosis for personal identification." International Journal of Legal Medicine, vol. 134, no. 3, 2020, pp. 1123-1129.
Deloire, L., et al. "Sphenoid sinus morphology for forensic identification." Forensic Imaging, vol. 18, 2019, pp. 34-39.
Moreira Andrade, V. "Frontal sinus identification: A 95-year retrospective." Forensic Imaging, vol. 31, 2022, 200523.
Nakamura, Y., et al. "Identification of a charred body through comparison of abdominal CT findings." Forensic Imaging, vol. 25, 2021, 200445.
Oshima, J., et al. "Post-mortem CT confirmation of aphakic eyes for identification." Forensic Science International: Reports, vol. 3, 2021, 100178.
Oura, P., et al. "Mastoid air cell morphology for identification." International Journal of Legal Medicine, vol. 136, no. 4, 2022, pp. 1125-1133.
Rodrigues, L. G., et al. "Mastoid process for radiographic identification." Forensic Imaging, vol. 22, 2020, 200387.
How to cite this article?
| APA Style | 4. Roy, N. (2026). Beyond the scalpel: The role of forensic radiology in mass disaster identification. Academic Journal of Forensic Sciences, 9(1), 1–15. |
| Chicago Style | |
| MLA Style | |
| DOI | |
| URL |