Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34679611›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Do We Really Need Hazard Prevention at the Expense of Safeguarding Death Dignity in COVID-19?

Cristoforo Pomara, Francesco Sessa, Domenico Galante, Lorenzo Pace, Antonio Fasanella, Nunzio Di Nunno, Massimiliano Esposito, Monica Salerno

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Cristoforo PomaraDepartment of Medical, Surgical and Advanced Technologies "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, 95121 Catania, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9895-3402
Francesco SessaDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Foggia, 71122 Foggia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0357-8791
Domenico GalanteIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Puglia e della Basilicata, 71121 Foggia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1159-2801
Lorenzo PaceIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Puglia e della Basilicata, 71121 Foggia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-0742-5119
Antonio FasanellaIstituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Puglia e della Basilicata, 71121 Foggia, Italy.
Nunzio Di NunnoDepartment of History, Society and Studies on Humanity, University of Salento, 73100 Lecce, Italy.
Massimiliano EspositoDepartment of Medical, Surgical and Advanced Technologies "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, 95121 Catania, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-7880-3450
Monica SalernoDepartment of Medical, Surgical and Advanced Technologies "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, 95121 Catania, Italy.
Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Puglia e della Basilicata · ITUniversity of Catania · ITUniversity of Foggia · ITUniversity of Salento · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To date, little is known regarding the transmission risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection for subjects involved in handling, transporting, and examining deceased persons with known or suspected COVID-19 positivity at the time of death. This experimental study aims to define if and/or how long SARS-CoV-2 persists with replication capacity in the tissues of individuals who died with/from COVID-19, thereby generating infectious hazards. Sixteen patients who died with/from COVID-19 who underwent autopsy between April 2020 and April 2021 were included in this study. Based on PMI, all samples were subdivided into two groups: 'short PMI' group (eight subjects who were autopsied between 12 to 72 h after death); 'long PMI' (eight subjects who were autopsied between 24 to 78 days after death). All patients tested positive for RT-PCR at nasopharyngeal swab both before death and on samples collected during post-mortem investigation. Moreover, a lung specimen was collected and frozen at -80 °C in order to perform viral culture. The result was defined based on the cytopathic effect (subjective reading) combined with the positivity of the RT-PCR test (objective reading) in the supernatant. Only in one sample (PMI 12 h), virus vitality was demonstrated. This study, supported by a literature review, suggests that the risk of cadaveric infection in cases of a person who died from/with COVID-19 is extremely low in the first hours after death, becoming null after 12 h after death, confirming the World Health Organization (WHO) assumed in March 2020 and suggesting that the corpse of a subject who died from/with COVID-19 should be generally considered not infectious.

Indexed as

autopsyCOVID-19RT-PCRSARS-CoV-2viral transmission

Identifiers

PMID34679611
PMCPMC8534407
OpenAlexW3206462768

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.