Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
Healthcare (Basel) ; 10(2)2022 Jan 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1667120


Health risks within prisons are well known and have worsened with the 2019 coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19), becoming a public health emergency. To date, there are more than 10 million inmates in the world; in most cases, conditions are bad and health care is scarce. A SARS-CoV-2 outbreak inside a prison is extremely rapid. The aim of this systematic review was to analyze all possible prevention techniques to reduce the risk of COVID-19 related infection within prisons. A systematic review of the literature was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar were used as search engines from 1 January 2020 to 1 November 2021 to evaluate the prevention of COVID-19 in prisoners. A total of 1757 articles were collected. Of them, 486 duplicates were removed. A total of 1250 articles did not meet the inclusion criteria. In conclusion, 21 articles were included in the present systematic review. From this analysis, it emerged that the most common COVID-19 prevention methods were the screening of the entire population (prisoners and workers) inside the prison through swab analysis and the reduction in overcrowding in prisons. Few studies concerned the prevention of COVID-19 infection through vaccination and the implementation of quarantine. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review that evaluates the prevention of COVID-19 within jails and the real effectiveness of all possible methods used and published in the literature. Finally, a very useful strategic protocol is provided to reduce the incidence of infection and to control and manage COVID-19 in prisons.

Diagnostics (Basel) ; 11(3)2021 Mar 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1160481


To date, there is poor evidence on the transmission of infection in individuals handling the bodies of deceased persons infected with SARS-CoV-2 and in particular, during autopsies. The aim of this study was to demonstrate that when appropriate strategies are adopted autopsy is a safe procedure with a minimal infection risk for all subjects involved (pathologists, technical personnel, and others) when proper strategies are adopted. We performed 16 autopsies on cadavers of persons who had died with confirmed COVID-19 with different post-mortem intervals (PMI). To confirm the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA, for each autopsy, 2 swabs were sampled from lungs, while to evaluate environmental contamination, 11 swabs were taken at three different times: T0 (before autopsy), T1 (at the end of the autopsy, without removing the corpse), and T2 (after cleaning and disinfecting the autopsy room). Specifically, 2 swabs were sampled on face shields used by each pathologist, and 4 swabs were collected on the autopsy table; 4 swabs were also collected from walls and 1 from floor. Lung swabs confirmed the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in all cases. Environmental swabs, collected at T0 and T2 were all negative, while swabs sampled at T1 were shown to be positive. Interestingly, no association was shown between PMI length and environmental contamination. Infection control strategies for safe management of clinical forensic autopsies of bodies with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 are also described.

Int J Environ Res Public Health ; 18(4)2021 02 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1060776


BACKGROUND: Neuroinvasive properties of SARS-CoV-2 have allowed the hypothesis of several pathogenic mechanisms related to acute and chronic neurological sequelae. However, neuropathological correlates have been poorly systematically investigated, being retrieved from reports of single case or limited case series still. METHODS: A PubMed search was carried out to review all publications on autopsy in subjects with "COronaVIrus Disease-19" (COVID-19). Among them, we focused on histological findings of the brain, which were compared with those from the authors' autoptic studies performed in some COVID-19 patients. RESULTS: Only seven studies reported histological evidence of brain pathology in patients deceased for COVID-19, including three with reverse transcription-quantitative polymerase chain reaction evidence of viral infection. All these studies, in line with our experience, showed vascular-related and infection-related secondary inflammatory tissue damage due to an abnormal immune response. It is still unclear, however, whether these findings are the effect of a direct viral pathology or rather reflect a non-specific consequence of cardiovascular and pulmonary disease on the brain. CONCLUSIONS: Notwithstanding the limited evidence available and the heterogeneity of the studies, we provide a preliminary description of the relationship between SARS-CoV-2 and brain sequelae. Systematic autoptic investigations are needed for accurate detection and adequate management of these patients.

Brain/pathology , COVID-19/complications , Nervous System Diseases/virology , Autopsy , Humans , Nervous System Diseases/pathology