Background: Post-mortem studies can provide important information for understanding new diseases and small autopsy case series have already reported different findings in COVID-19 patients. Methods: We evaluated whether some specific post-mortem features are observed in these patients and if these changes are related to the presence of the virus in different organs. Complete macroscopic and microscopic autopsies were performed on different organs in 17 COVID-19 non-survivors. Presence of SARS-CoV-2 was evaluated with immunohistochemistry (IHC) in lung samples and with real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test in the lung and other organs. Results: Pulmonary findings revealed early-stage diffuse alveolar damage (DAD) in 15 out of 17 patients and microthrombi in small lung arteries in 11 patients. Late-stage DAD, atypical pneumocytes, and/or acute pneumonia were also observed. Four lung infarcts, two acute myocardial infarctions, and one ischemic enteritis were observed. There was no evidence of myocarditis, hepatitis, or encephalitis. Kidney evaluation revealed the presence of hemosiderin in tubules or pigmented casts in most patients. Spongiosis and vascular congestion were the most frequently encountered brain lesions. No specific SARS-CoV-2 lesions were observed in any organ. IHC revealed positive cells with a heterogeneous distribution in the lungs of 11 of the 17 (65%) patients; RT-PCR yielded a wide distribution of SARS-CoV-2 in different tissues, with 8 patients showing viral presence in all tested organs (i.e., lung, heart, spleen, liver, colon, kidney, and brain). Conclusions: In conclusion, autopsies revealed a great heterogeneity of COVID-19-associated organ injury and the remarkable absence of any specific viral lesions, even when RT-PCR identified the presence of the virus in many organs.
Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) of genomic macrorestriction fragments has been used by the Belgian Reference Laboratory for Staphylococci for national hospital surveys of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus since 1992. The sequencing of the polymorphic X region of the protein A gene (spa typing) offers significant advantages over PFGE in terms of speed, ease of interpretation, and exportability. To validate its potential use for national surveillance, we evaluated the robustness of spa typing compared with that of PFGE based on a collection of 217 S. aureus strains representative of the Belgian S. aureus epidemiology during the last 13 years. spa typing and PFGE both showed high discriminatory power (discriminatory indexes of 0.98 and 0.96, respectively) and achieved high concordance (95.9%) in type classification. Both methods also showed good concordance with multilocus sequence typing (MLST) (95.5%). However, we observed occasional "violations" of MLST clonal complex assignment by spa typing. Our results suggest that both PFGE and spa typing are reliable methods for long-term, nationwide epidemiological surveillance studies. We suggest that spa typing, which is a single-locus-based method, should preferably be used in combination with additional markers, such as staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec typing or resistance or virulence gene detection.
Methicillin-resistant isolates lacking genes ( = 32), collected from Belgian hospitals, were characterized for their β-lactamase production and the presence of mutations in genes, the promoter, and genes involved in penicillin-binding protein 4 overproduction ( and ). Twelve isolates were β-lactamase hyperproducers (BHPs), while 12 non-BHP isolates might produce an incomplete GdpP protein. Most isolates showed nucleotide missense mutations in genes. A few isolates also showed mutations in the promoter.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.