Prospective postmortem evaluation of 735 consecutive SARS-CoV-2-associated death cases

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has become a global pandemic with significant mortality. Accurate information on the specific circumstances of death and whether patients died from or with SARS-CoV-2 is scarce. To distinguish COVID-19 from non-COVID-19 deaths, we performed a systematic review of 735 SARS-CoV-2-associated deaths in Hamburg, Germany, from March to December 2020, using conventional autopsy, ultrasound-guided minimally invasive autopsy, postmortem computed tomography and medical records. Statistical analyses including multiple logistic regression were used to compare both cohorts. 84.1% (n = 618) were classified as COVID-19 deaths, 6.4% (n = 47) as non-COVID-19 deaths, 9.5% (n = 70) remained unclear. Median age of COVID-19 deaths was 83.0 years, 54.4% were male. In the autopsy group (n = 283), the majority died of pneumonia and/or diffuse alveolar damage (73.6%; n = 187). Thromboses were found in 39.2% (n = 62/158 cases), pulmonary embolism in 22.1% (n = 56/253 cases). In 2020, annual mortality in Hamburg was about 5.5% higher than in the previous 20 years, of which 3.4% (n = 618) represented COVID-19 deaths. Our study highlights the need for mortality surveillance and postmortem examinations. The vast majority of individuals who died directly from SARS-CoV-2 infection were of advanced age and had multiple comorbidities.

COVID-19 Bimodal Clinical and Pathological Phenotypes

Background Patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) present varying clinical complications. Different viral load and host response related to genetic and immune background are probably the reasons for these differences. We aimed to sought clinical and pathological correlation that justifies the different clinical outcomes among COVID-19 autopsies cases. Methods Minimally invasive autopsy was performed on forty-seven confirmed COVID-19 patients from May-July, 2020. Electronic medical record of all patients was collected and a comprehensive histopathological evaluation was performed. Immunohistochemistry, immunofluorescence, special stain, western blotting and post-mortem real-time reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction on fresh lung tissue were performed. Resultss We show that 5/47 (10,6%) patients present a progressive decline in oxygenation index for acute respiratory distress syndrome (PaO2/FiO2 ratio), low compliance levels, interstitial fibrosis, high α-SMA+ cells/protein expression, high collagens I/III deposition and NETs(P<0.05), named as fibrotic phenotype (N=5). Conversely, 10/47 (21,2%) patients demonstrated progressive increase in PaO2/FiO2 ratio, high pulmonary compliance levels, preserved elastic framework, increase thrombus formation and high platelets and D-dimer levels at admission (P<0.05), named as thrombotic phenotype. While 32/47 (68,1%) had a mixed phenotypes between both ones. Conclusions We believe that categorization of patients based on these two phenotypes can be used to develop prognostic tools and potential therapies since the PaO2/FiO2 ratio variation and D-dimer levels correlate with the underlying fibrotic or thrombotic pathologic process, respectively; which may indicate possible clinical outcome of the patient.

Dying From Or With SARS-CoV-2 – Prospective Postmortem Evaluation of 735 Consecutive Death Cases –

BackgroundCoronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has become a global pandemic with significant mortality. Accurate information on the specific circumstances of death and whether patients died from or with SARS-CoV-2 is scarce.MethodsTo distinguish COVID-19 from non-COVID-19 deaths, we performed a systematic review of 735 SARS-CoV-2-associated deaths in Hamburg, Germany, from March to December 2020, using conventional autopsy, ultrasound-guided minimally invasive autopsy, postmortem computed tomography and medical records. Statistical analyses including multiple logistic regression were used to compare both cohorts.Findings84.1% (n=618) were classified as COVID-19 deaths, 6.4% (n=47) as non-COVID-19 deaths, 9.5% (n=70) remained unclear. Median age of COVID-19 deaths was 83.0 years, 54.4% were male. In the autopsy group (n=283), the majority died of pneumonia and/or diffuse alveolar damage (73.6%; n=187). Thromboses were found in 39.2% (n=62/158 cases), pulmonary embolism in 22.1% (n=56/253 cases). In 2020, annual mortality in Hamburg was about 5.5% higher than in the previous 20 years, of which 3.4% (n=618) represented COVID-19 deaths.InterpretationOur study highlights the need for mortality surveillance and postmortem examinations. The vast majority of individuals who died directly from SARS-CoV-2 infection were of advanced age and had multiple comorbidities.

Assessing viability of a minimally invasive autopsy technique in ascertaining the probable cause of death in patients who were SARS CoV19 positive at the time of their demise

Background SARS CoV-19 was declared as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO), raising up challenges on various levels ranging from therapeutics to diagnostics. The conventional autopsy technique may pose a health hazard to health care workers. A minimally invasive autopsy technique can diminish this hazard. Materials and methods Between August and November 2020, 51 patients who were suffering from Covid-19 at the time of their demise were included. A novel minimally invasive ultrasound-guided technique for procuring tissue samples of major organs was employed which were thereafter subject to histopathological examination. A detailed review of the course in hospital was noted. An analysis was performed to correlate the cause of death ascertained from our minimally invasive technique with the cause of death ascertained clinically. Results There was adequate tissue sampling in 45 cases, where the minimally invasive autopsy technique confirmed the cause of death in all 45 cases (100%) and made it more specific in 5 cases (11.11%). Conclusion Minimally Invasive Autopsy is an easily reproducible technique which has the potential to strengthen the probable the cause of death with reasonable certainty while ensuring safety and ethics.

Accuracy of verbal autopsy, clinical data and minimally invasive autopsy in the evaluation of malaria-specific mortality: an observational study

BackgroundGlobal malaria mortality estimates are hindered by the low reliability of the verbal autopsy (VA) and the clinical records, the most common sources of information used to estimate malaria-specific mortality. We aimed to determine the accuracy of these tools, as well as of the minimally invasive autopsy (MIA), a needle-based postmortem sampling method, to identify malaria-specific mortality in a large series of deceased patients from Mozambique, using complete autopsy as the gold standard.MethodsObservational study that included 264 deaths, occurring at a tertiary level hospital in Mozambique, from 1 November 2013 to 31 March 2015 (17 months-long period). Clinical data were abstracted, a computer coded VA was completed using the clinical data as source of information, and an MIA followed by a complete autopsy were performed. Screening for malaria infection was conducted postmortem to all participants using molecular and histological techniques (PCR and immunohistochemistry).FindingsMalaria infection was considered the cause of death in 6/264 (2.3%) cases: 2/54 children (3.7%, both less than 5 years old) and 4/57 (7.0%) maternal deaths. The sensitivity and specificity of the VA, the clinical data and the MIA to identify malaria-specific deaths were 33.3% and 96.1%, 66.7% and 96.1%, and 100% and 100%, respectively. In addition, malaria was identified as a possible contributor in 14 additional patients who died of other diseases. These cases were also accurately identified by the MIA (sensitivity 82.4%, specificity 100%).InterpretationThe high sensitivity and specificity of the MIA in identifying malaria may help to improve current estimates of malaria-specific mortality in endemic areas.

Minimally Invasive Autopsy Practice in COVID-19 Cases: Biosafety and Findings

Postmortem studies are crucial for providing insight into emergent diseases. However, a complete autopsy is frequently not feasible in highly transmissible diseases due to biohazard challenges. Minimally invasive autopsy (MIA) is a needle-based approach aimed at collecting samples of key organs without opening the body, which may be a valid alternative in these cases. We aimed to: a) provide biosafety guidelines for conducting MIAs in COVID-19 cases, b) compare the performance of MIA versus complete autopsy, and c) evaluate the safety of the procedure. Between October and December 2020, MIAs were conducted in six deceased patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19, in a basic autopsy room, with reinforced personal protective equipment. Samples from the lungs and key organs were successfully obtained in all cases. A complete autopsy was performed on the same body immediately after the MIA. The diagnoses of the MIA matched those of the complete autopsy. In four patients, COVID-19 was the main cause of death, being responsible for the different stages of diffuse alveolar damage. No COVID-19 infection was detected in the personnel performing the MIAs or complete autopsies. In conclusion, MIA might be a feasible, adequate and safe alternative for cause of death investigation in COVID-19 cases.