» Articles » PMID: 34910166

Minimally Invasive Tissue Sampling Findings in 12 Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019

Abstract

Background: Minimally invasive tissue sampling (MITS), a postmortem procedure that uses core needle biopsy samples and does not require opening the body, may be a valid alternative to complete autopsy (CA) in highly infectious diseases such as coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). This study aimed to (1) compare the performance of MITS and CA in a series of COVID-19 deaths and (2) evaluate the safety of the procedure.

Methods: From October 2020 to February 2021, MITS was conducted in 12 adults who tested positive before death for COVID-19, in a standard, well-ventilated autopsy room, where personnel used reinforced personal protective equipment. In 9 cases, a CA was performed after MITS. A thorough histological evaluation was conducted, and the presence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) was evaluated by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and immunohistochemistry.

Results: The diagnoses provided by MITS and CA matched almost perfectly. In 9 patients, COVID-19 was in the chain of events leading to death, being responsible for diffuse alveolar damage and mononuclear T-cell inflammatory response in the lungs. No specific COVID-19 features were identified. Three deaths were not related to COVID-19. All personnel involved in MITS repeatedly tested negative for COVID-19. SARS-CoV-2 was identified by RT-PCR and immunohistochemistry in the MITS samples, particularly in the lungs.

Conclusions: MITS is useful for evaluating COVID-19-related deaths in settings where a CA is not feasible. The results of this simplified and safer technique are comparable to those of CA.

Citing Articles

Minimally Invasive Tissue Sampling Surveillance Alliance-Facilitating the Expansion of Pathology-Based Mortality Surveillance.

Goco N, McClure E, Rakislova N, Bassat Q Clin Infect Dis. 2021; 73(Suppl_5):S337-S340.

PMID: 34910169 PMC: 8672742. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciab827.

References
1.
Pomara C, Volti G, Cappello F . COVID-19 Deaths: Are We Sure It Is Pneumonia? Please, Autopsy, Autopsy, Autopsy!. J Clin Med. 2020; 9(5). PMC: 7287760. DOI: 10.3390/jcm9051259. View

2.
Richardson S, Hirsch J, Narasimhan M, Crawford J, McGinn T, Davidson K . Presenting Characteristics, Comorbidities, and Outcomes Among 5700 Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19 in the New York City Area. JAMA. 2020; 323(20):2052-2059. PMC: 7177629. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.6775. View

3.
Lax S, Skok K, Zechner P, Kessler H, Kaufmann N, Koelblinger C . Pulmonary Arterial Thrombosis in COVID-19 With Fatal Outcome : Results From a Prospective, Single-Center, Clinicopathologic Case Series. Ann Intern Med. 2020; 173(5):350-361. PMC: 7249507. DOI: 10.7326/M20-2566. View

4.
Rakislova N, Fernandes F, Lovane L, Jamisse L, Castillo P, Sanz A . Standardization of Minimally Invasive Tissue Sampling Specimen Collection and Pathology Training for the Child Health and Mortality Prevention Surveillance Network. Clin Infect Dis. 2019; 69(Suppl 4):S302-S310. PMC: 6785668. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciz565. View

5.
Maixenchs M, Anselmo R, Zielinski-Gutierrez E, Odhiambo F, Akello C, Ondire M . Willingness to Know the Cause of Death and Hypothetical Acceptability of the Minimally Invasive Autopsy in Six Diverse African and Asian Settings: A Mixed Methods Socio-Behavioural Study. PLoS Med. 2016; 13(11):e1002172. PMC: 5119724. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002172. View