ArticleForensic science, medicine, and pathology2021
Post-mortem CT lung findings at a medicolegal institute in SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive cases with autopsy correlation.
Article in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The current state of forensic imaging - post mortem imaging.International journal of legal medicine · 2025Review
- Korean radiographers' awareness, experiences, and education needs in forensic medicine and forensic radiology.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Postmortem chest computed tomography in COVID-19: A minimally invasive autopsy method.European journal of radiology open · 2024Article
- Potentials of post-mortem CT investigations during SARS-COV-2 pandemic: a narrative review.La Radiologia medica · 2022Review
- Regarding "Post-mortem CT lung findings at a medicolegal institute in SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR positive cases with autopsy correlation".Forensic science, medicine, and pathology · 2022Article
- Postmortem CT in decedents with SARS-CoV-2 infection. A single institution experience.Forensic sciences research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
CoVID-19 is a novel viral infection with now well-established clinical radiological findings. There is limited data on post-mortem imaging. We explore the proposition that PMCT could be used as screening test. In an 11-week period, 39 deceased persons were referred for medicolegal investigation with pre-existing or subsequent nasopharyngeal swabs showing positivity on SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing. All 39 had routine whole-body CT scans on admission and 12 underwent medicolegal autopsy. These cases were contrasted with 4 others which were negative on nasopharyngeal swabs despite PMCT findings suggestive of CoVID-19 pneumonia (designated false positive). Nine of the 12 autopsies showed lung histology consistent with those reported in CoVID-19 pneumonia. Typical clinical CoVID-19 lung findings on PMCT were only detected in 5 (42%). In 3 of the 4 false positive cases, lung findings showed non-COVID-19 histology but in 1, findings were identical. PMCT CoVID-19 findings in the lungs are therefore not specific and may not be detected in all cases due to obscuration by expected agonal CT findings or other pathologies that pre-dated SARS-CoV-2 infection. PMCT findings may otherwise be subtle. Although PMCT may hint at CoVID-19, we believe that nasopharyngeal swabs are still required for definitive diagnosis. Even with positive swabs, clinical CoVID-19 lung findings on PMCT are often not detected. PMCT findings can be subtle, extreme or obscured by agonal changes. Given this range of PMCT changes, the challenge for pathologists is to determine whether death has been caused by, or merely associated with, SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.