In crime scene investigations, DNA left by touch on an object can be found frequently and the significant improvements in short tandem repeat (STR) amplification in recent years built up a high expectation to identify the individual(s) who touched the object by their DNA profile. Nevertheless, the percentage of reliably analysable samples varies considerably between different crime scenes even if the nature of the stains appears to be very similar. Here, it has been proposed that the amount and quality of DNA left at a crime scene may be influenced by external factors (like nature of the surface) and/or individual factors (like skin conditions). In this study, the influence of the age of an individual who left his DNA on an object is investigated. Handprints from 213 individuals (1 to 89 years old) left on a plastic syringe were analysed for DNA amount and STR alleles using Quantifiler® and PowerPlex® ESX 17. A full profile of the individual could be found in 75 % of all children up to 10 years, 9 % of adolescents (11 to 20 years), 25 % of adults (21 to 60 years) and 8 % of elderly people (older than 60 years). No person older than 80 years displayed a full profile. Drop-in and drop-out artefacts occurred frequently throughout the age groups. A dependency of quantity and quality of the DNA left on a touched object on the age of the individual could be clearly demonstrated at least for children and elderly people. An epithelial abrasion unexpectedly good to interpret may be derived from a child, whereas the suspected skin contact of an elderly person with an object may be impossible to prove.
The successful analysis of weak biological stains by means of highly sensitive short tandem repeat (STR) amplification has been increased significantly over the recent years. Nevertheless, the percentage of reliably analysable samples varies considerably between different crime scene investigations even if the nature of the stains appears to be the same. It has been proposed that the amount and quality of DNA left at a crime scene may be due to individual skin conditions (among other factors). Therefore, we investigated DNA from handprints from 30 patients acutely suffering from skin diseases like atopic dermatitis, psoriasis or skin ulcer before and after therapy by STR amplification using the new and highly sensitive Powerplex® ESX17 kit in comparison to 22 healthy controls. Handprints from atopic dermatitis patients showed a correct and reliable DNA profile in 90% and 40% of patients before and after therapy, respectively. Regarding psoriasis patients, we detected full DNA profiles in only 64% and 55% of handprints before and after therapy. In contrast, in ulcus patients and controls, full DNA profiles were obtained in much lower numbers. We conclude that active skin diseases like atopic dermatitis or psoriasis have a considerable impact on the amplificable DNA left by skin contact with surfaces. Since up to 7% of adults in European countries suffer from one of these diseases, this could explain at least partially the varying quality of DNA from weak stains.
Forensic genetic analysis of items possibly handled by a suspect or a victim is frequently inquired by the law enforcement authorities, since DNA left on touched objects can often be linked to an individual. Due to technical improvement, even poor traces, which seemed to be unsuitable for DNA analysis a few years ago, may be amplified successfully today. Yet, DNA can be transferred to a crime scene artificially or unintentionally without any primary contact between the individual and the object found at the crime scene, the so-called secondary transfer or indirect transfer in general. In this study, "secondary transfer" scenarios with cells and DNA of different origins under wet conditions were investigated. Transfer was simulated as either "washing by hand" in a washtub or as "machine laundry" in a washing machine. As expected, major differences were seen between blood stains and epithelial abrasions. DNA from blood donors could be detected clearly both on the donor and on the acceptor textile, regardless of washing method. Regarding epithelial abrasions, simulating worn clothes, after washing by hand, only little residual DNA was found, and partial profiles were displayed on the donor textile, while transfer to the acceptor textile occurred even less and not in noteworthy amount and quality. Single alleles could be found both on donor textiles and acceptor textiles after simulated machine wash, but no reliable DNA profile could be verified after laundry in machine. Therefore, a DNA transfer from one worn cloth (without blood stains) to another textile in the washing machine seems to be extremely unlikely.
A 76-year-old male suffering from nephrolithiasis developed a shock syndrome 5 days after extracorporal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL). CT scan of the abdomen showed massive haemorrhage around the right kidney. Although nephrectomy was performed immediately, the haemorrhage could not be controlled. Numerous units of erythrocytes were transfused, but the patient died. The autopsy revealed massive retroperitoneal haemorrhage around the right kidney. The kidney showed a subcapsular haematoma and a rupture of the capsule. The right renal artery was dissected. The inferior vena cava was lacerated. Accordingly, a hemorrhagic shock as the cause of death was determined, which might mainly have resulted from the laceration of the inferior vena cava due to ESWL. ESWL seems to be a relatively non-invasive modality, but one of its severe complications is perirenal hematoma. The injuries of the blood vessels might have been caused by excessive shock waves. Subsequently, anticoagulation therapy had been resumed 3 days after EWSL, which might have triggered the haemorrhage. Physicians should note that a haemorrhage after an ESWL can occur and they should pay attention to the postoperative management in aged individuals especially when they are under anticoagulation therapy.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.