key: cord-0832913-9qkwcm9d
authors: Sperhake, Jan-Peter
title: Autopsies of COVID-19 deceased? Absolutely!
date: 2020-07-26
journal: Leg Med (Tokyo)
DOI: 10.1016/j.legalmed.2020.101769
sha: dac1195424b7dacdba0ca9495d7db3c828d0d2e6
doc_id: 832913
cord_uid: 9qkwcm9d

• Autopsies are indispensable in the management of the COVID 19 pandemic. • Many essential scientific findings can only be obtained on the basis of autopsies. • The risk of infection from autopsies of SARS-CoV-2 positive patients is manageable. • More autopsies should be performed worldwide.

At the end of 2019, the outbreak of a novel virus of the corona family, SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2), which causes COVID-19 (Corona Virus Disease 2019), began in Wuhan, China. Since then, a dynamic has developed worldwide, which first led to numerous cases of the disease in Asia and then in Europe. While in these parts of the world the infection activity has been contained by strong public restrictions (lockdown), the pandemic is now concentrated in North and South America, namely in countries such as the USA, India, Brazil, Chile and Peru. According to WHO data, there were 12,929,306 confirmed infections and 569,738 deaths worldwide on 14 July 2020 [1] .

As soon as the pandemic reached the various countries, many of them began a wide range of scientific activities, focusing on the development of vaccines, the characterization of virus properties and clinical aspects of COVID-19. Initially, clinical and radiological data on the lungs of COVID-19 patients were available, but patho-morphological investigations were rarely undertaken. Naturally, the first publications on this subject came from China in February and March 2020, including results of lung biopsies of both living patients [2, 3] and deceased patients [4] being examined. The first published full autopsy with macroscopic photographs in a COVID-19 patient was provided in a medico-legal journal from China in February 2020 [5] . Systematic examinations of autopsies were missing until then.

It is not quite clear why there has been a certain reluctance to perform autopsies of patients who died of COVID-19 until today. It is true that in Germany the Robert Koch Institute (a German health monitoring institution) -at least in the initial phase of the pandemic -had advised against performing autopsies. However, the author is not aware of such clear votes against autopsies by other large health organizations such as the WHO, the Royal College of Pathologists (UK) or the CDC (USA). (Fulfillable) guidelines regarding minimum requirements for safe autopsies, e.g. concerning personal protection and room exhaustion, do exist, however [6, 7, 8] .

Apparently autopsies are carried out here and there in the USA, which is particularly affected by COVID-19. Davis and Williamson published a letter in early June 2020, which deals with the risk of infection during COVID-19 autopsies [9] . A survey of 200 participating autopsy institutions has shown that at the time of writing there have been at least 225 autopsies in 14 states of the USA. For whatever reason, no major case series seem to have been investigated so far.

If publications on COVID-19 autopsy series are seen as an indicator for the autopsy frequency in the respective country, Germany, Italy, the USA, Switzerland, Austria and Great Britain seem to be countries where autopsies are performed at all -at least in individual centers. The studies used as a basis for this conclusion were PubMed-listed studies (search terms were COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, autop* and post mort* in various combinations) whose case numbers go beyond mere case reports (which are of course also important) (n>2; see Table 1 ). Postmortem study results also come from Brazil, China and France, but the tissue examined was obtained using different biopsy techniques ("minimally invasive autopsy"). [16, 29] . The world's largest series of 80 consecutive autopsies from the Hamburg Department of Legal Medicine was presented by Edler et al. [10] .

The main reason for the great reluctance worldwide to perform autopsies seems to be concerns about infectivity emanating from deceased persons. It remains somewhat unclear whether these concerns relate more to the health and safety of individual (forensic) pathologists, or to infection control in general. As far as the safety of the doctors and auxiliary staff involved in the autopsy is concerned, it must be objected that, in clinical pathology but particularly in forensic medicine every corpse must be considered potentially infectious. This starts with the risk of injuries, which can be an entry point for bacterial wound infections or viral diseases such as hepatitis C or HIV. But also diseases spread by air, such as meningococcal meningitis or tuberculosis, pose a real danger to the health of the autopsy staff. Often it is not even known that an infectious disease is present before the autopsy. Even if a disease like tuberculosis is known, an autopsy will still be performed with FFP2 or FFP3 mouthguards. Of course, other considerations apply in the case of highly infectious viral diseases with high mortality, such as Ebola.

Particularly in the case of sharply rising infection figures, as is currently the case in the USA or Brazil, the risk of encountering an unknown SARS-CoV-2-infected person if the autopsy is performed for other reasons, such as after homicide, is quite real. However, one will not be able to avoid such genuinely forensic autopsies with regard to latent risk of infection, which means that one must always protect oneself to a certain extent. But if the infection is known, specific precautions would be undertaken.

In the end, the literature is dominated by appeals for more autopsies to be performed (23, (30) (31) (32) (33) [36] : "Autopsies should be restricted to wellmotivated cases [...]" -without specifying which cases this should be. However, both recommendations were made in the early stages of the pandemic.

Remarkably, Davis et al. registered only one case of infection in their survey after 225 autopsies, in which it is considered probable that the affected person was not infected by the autopsy but from community exposure [9] . Han et al. also report no disease symptoms in 6 participants after 24 COVID-19 autopsies [13] .

In Hamburg, all autopsies were performed in a special autopsy room for infectious corpses (air suction directly at the autopsy table downwards). All persons involved wore FFP3 masks and the otherwise usual protective clothing. After more than 150 autopsies, there were no cases of disease or infection (PCR negative throat swabs, negative serology -unpublished data) among the approx. 25 persons involved (technical staff, doctors).

The autopsies made it possible to examine COVID-19-associated deaths more closely than would have been possible by purely clinical observations. In Hamburg, it was noticed after only a few autopsies that the frequency of deep vein thromboses and partially fatal pulmonary embolisms in the deceased COVID-19 patients was much higher than initially suspected [10, 16] (see Figs. 1-2) . Many of the lungs examined were very large, extremely heavy and brittle. The pleura as well as the cut surfaces showed a patterned juxtaposition of pale and hyperemic areas (Fig. 3) . Even though most of the affected patients die clinically in respiratory failure, the patho-morphological images are quite differentiated. In many patients of the evaluated studies the classic signs of diffuse alveolar damage (DAD), the pathological equivalent of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), were present in the sense of an atypical viral pneumonia (Figs. 4 and 5) . However, this was not the case in all patients. Some had rather the findings of a purulent bronchopneumonia, so that one can ask whether SARS-CoV-2 in these cases rather was the basis for bacterial superinfection. Among the 80 cases published by Edler et al. there were also those which, after autopsy, showed an alternative, COVID-19-independent cause of death (e.g. pericardial tamponade in myocardial rupture after myocardial infarction), which, strictly speaking, were COVID-19 disease cases but not COVID-19 deaths in a narrower sense [10] . The authors proposed a four-level classification scheme according to pathological-morphological criteria (category 1: certain COVID-19 deaths, category 2: probable COVID-19 death, category 3: Possible COVID-19 death with an equal alternative cause of death, 3category 4: SARS-CoV-2 detection with cause of death not associated to to take into account the variability of the deaths.

In all post-mortem studies with larger case numbers, the average age of the deceased was quite high at about 80 years. A shift towards younger ages, as in Carsana et al. (69 years), one must probably assume a selection effect, since although the autopsies were performed in consecutive deaths, only patients from certain referral centres were considered [11] . In contrast, the study by Edler et al. is more representative because all COVID-19-associated deaths of patients known to the authorities outside the clinics were also examined [10] . Clinically already known or autoptically detected comorbidities (e.g. heart disease, lung disease, renal failure, diabetes, obesity, etc.) were frequently represented in all studies.

The study by Puelles et al. provided important findings, which were able to detect the virus in various organs such as kidneys, liver and brain [29] . Ackermann et al. were able to show that angiogenesis in the lungs of deceased COVID-19 patients was enhanced compared to influenza patients [24] . These are examples of how autopsies open the door to many important branches of research.

The results from the analyzed studies show that autopsies are essential in the COVID-19 pandemic. They enable a more differentiated assessment of mortality. More important than the determination of the cause of death, however, is the fact that only the autopsy (including histological and virological examinations) opens up the possibility of investigating the spread of the virus in the body, the involvement of various organ systems, but also the late effects of the disease -an aspect that is becoming increasingly important since, after more than 4 months of pandemic, there are many "recoveries" that may not have recovered as fully as had been hoped.

There are few valid reasons not to perform autopsies in COVID-19 deceased if the technical equipment meets certain minimum standards. It is easy to protect oneself against infection during the autopsy. Both clinical and forensic pathologists -preferably in cooperation -play an important role in gaining knowledge about the new disease as a basis for therapeutic measures and global pandemic control. Fig. 1 : Pulmonary embolism in a 91-year-old man. 

WHO Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Dashboard

Pulmonary pathology of early-phase 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pneumonia in two patients with lung cancer

Histopathologic changes and SARS-CoV-2 immunostaining in the lung of a patient with COVID-19

Pathological findings of COVID-19 associated with acute respiratory distress syndrome

Gross examination report of a COVID-19 death autopsy

Infection prevention and control for the safe management of a dead body in the context of COVID-19

Collection and submission of postmortem specimens from deceased persons with known or suspected COVID-19

The Royal College of Pathologists, Autopsy practice relating to possible cases of COVID-19 (2019-nCov

Risk of COVID-19 transmission during autopsy

Dying with SARS-CoV-2 infection-an autopsy study of the first consecutive

Pulmonary post-mortem findings in a series of COVID-19 cases from northern Italy: a two-centre descriptive study

Ultrasound-guided minimally invasive autopsies: A protocol for the study of pulmonary and systemic involvement of COVID-19

COVID-19 Autopsies and Personal Protective Equipment

Post-mortem examination of COVID19 patients reveals diffuse alveolar damage with severe capillary congestion and variegated findings of lungs and other organs suggesting vascular dysfunction

Postmortem swabs in the Sars-CoV-2 Pandemic: Report on 12 complete clinical autopsy cases

Autopsy findings and venous thromboembolism in patients with COVID-19

Postmortem examination of patients with COVID-19

Pulmonary arterial thrombosis in COVID-19 with fatal outcome: Results from a prospective, single-center

Pulmonary and systemic involvement of COVID-19 assessed by ultrasound-guided minimally invasive autopsy

Pulmonary and cardiac pathology in African American patients with COVID-19: an autopsy series from New Orleans

Pathological changes of the spleen in ten patients with coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) by postmortem needle autopsy

Pathological changes of fatal coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the lungs: report of 10 cases by postmortem needle autopsy

COVID-19 autopsy in people who died in community settings: the first series

Pulmonary vascular endothelialitis, thrombosis and angiogenesis in Covid-19

Time to consider histologic pattern of lung injury to treat critically ill patients with COVID-19 infection

The evolution of pulmonary pathology in fatal COVID-19 disease: an autopsy study with clinical correlation

The emerging spectrum of cardiopulmonary pathology of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): Report of 3 autopsies from Houston, Texas, and review of autopsy findings from other United States cities

A pathological report of three COVID-19 cases by minimal invasive autopsies

Multiorgan and renal tropism of SARS-CoV-2

Autopsy slowdown hinders quest to determine how coronavirus kills

Buja A call to action: the need for autopsies to determine the full extent of organ involvement associated with COVID-19

Academician Cong Bin: Autopsy of SARS-CoV-2 infection is needed to be strengthened

Unlocking the lockdown of science and demystifying COVID-19: how autopsies contribute to our understanding of a deadly pandemic

COVID-19 deaths: Are we sure it is pneumonia? Please, autopsy, autopsy, autopsy!

Recommendations of the Polish Society of Forensic Medicine and Criminology and National Consultant for forensic medicine with regard to performing forensic post-mortem examinations in case of confirmed COVID-19 disease and suspected SARS CoV-2 infections

The autopsy debate during the COVID-19 emergency: the Italian experience