Flammability and combustion hazard of preserved human tissues

Abstract

Preservation techniques have evolved over the years to respond to the need of longer dissection periods, with formaldehyde being widely used for this purpose. In recent years, efforts have been focusing on reducing the health hazards of this fixative and the rigidity of the tissues embalmed with it. With every embalming technique that they are either developing or resurrecting from various protocols, institutions need to assess the fire and health hazards of all the chemicals being used. Compliance with the storage and handling safeguards listed in the Material Safety Data Sheet of each chemical, needs to be accompanied by infrastructure changes. To reduce the health hazards of formaldehyde, institutions are taking appropriate countermeasures directed at the source itself, by using substitutes or injecting formaldehyde chelating agents, and are adopting high performance air extraction systems to protect the users. However, little is known about the flammability risk of embalmed human bodies. During a recent visit to McGill University morgue by architects and safety inspectors to expand it, we were asked about the flammability risk of the embalmed specimens, so we carried out a flashpoint test to evaluate the flammability potential of specimens embalmed with each of our three embalming techniques: formaldehyde‐based, Thiel, and phenol‐based. With the phenol‐based embalming showing the most risks, attention should be drawn to all institutions who are experimenting with various embalming techniques to evaluate the flammability potential of their embalmed specimens.

The chemicals between us—First results of the cluster analyses on anatomy embalming procedures in the German‐speaking countries

“…It has been stated in literature that the critical concentration of ethanol is reached at 3.5% of fumes 45 . Similar considerations should be made if phenol forms part of the embalming formula 46 . Critical concentrations are unlikely to be reached in the dissection laboratory environment, especially if air ventilation systems have been installed, 36,47 and if room temperatures are lowered as to decrease permissible concentrations below the critical limit 48 .…”

“…Explosion-proof installations seem reasonable especially if flammable vapors may arise from the chemicals deployed, 45 or if the specimen themselves may pose a risk of combustion especially directly following the embalming procedure. 46 Surprisingly, not all institutes deploying ethanol as a main component of their embalming protocol responded to have explosion-proof mortuary facilities, which may pose a certain risk if explosive vapors start forming. 45 It has been stated in literature that the critical concentration of ethanol is reached at 3.5% of fumes.…”

“…45 Similar considerations should be made if phenol forms part of the embalming formula. 46 Critical concentrations are unlikely to be reached in the dissection laboratory environment, especially if air ventilation systems have been installed, 36,47 and if room temperatures are lowered as to decrease permissible concentrations below the critical limit. 48 However, especially in the mortuary environment, where undiluted chemicals are handled at large quantities within relatively low space volumes and limited air exchange but higher room temperature, a realistic scenario of an accident exists.…”