ArticleCureus2023
Comparison of Histological Changes in Tissue Specimens Kept in Tap Water, River Water and Seawater for Different Intervals of Time.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundForensic pathologists find it difficult to ascertain the actual reason for death and the actual mode of death in drowning cases. It is commonly acknowledged that not all people whose dead bodies are found in water perished from drowning. The medico-legal inquiry includes an important component that examines dead bodies collected from the water. The corpse's time in the water continues to be the main concern. This aids in determining the time of death, which is crucial to any medico-legal investigation. The traditional histological analysis of hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained oral soft tissue can be crucial in the assessment of this feature. Hence, this study was done to compare histological changes in the tissue specimens kept in tap water, river water, and seawater for different intervals of time. MATERIALS AND
methodsOne hundred eighty specimens were obtained from 180 dead bodies and divided randomly into three categories. Category A consisted of 60 specimens submerged in tap water, Category B of 60 specimens submersed in river water, and Category C consisted of 60 specimens submerged in seawater. The specimens underwent routine histological processing and H&E staining. The microscopic evaluation of specimens was carried out at two hours and on the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth days of submersion. Details were recorded regarding the structural changes, cellular changes, connective tissue changes, changes in the basement membrane, and intensity of H&E staining. Once the process of routine histological processing and H&E staining was completed for each study specimen, an evaluation of microscopic changes in the tissue was made.
resultsThe present study revealed that seawater preserved tissue best and for a longer period than river water and tap water. River water preserved tissue better than tap water. In pathologic tissue, details were preserved for much longer. It was noted that in squamous cell carcinoma, connective tissue was destroyed earlier than epithelium, in contrast to normal tissue where epithelium was destroyed before connective tissue.
conclusionThis study indicates that the medium of submersion in drowning victims affects the histopathological features. The time of death is an important aspect of forensic investigation. Considering this, all cases of drowning should be very carefully evaluated, and the medium taken into consideration while determining the time of death, as tissue degrades faster in freshwater than in seawater.
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.