A review on histotechnology practices in COVID-19 pathology investigations

Abstract

COVID-19 disease in humans, caused by the novel SARS-CoV-2 virus, was first reported in the city of Wuhan, China in December 2019. This disease has quickly developed into a global pandemic, resulting in over 350,000 deaths worldwide and over 5 million confirmed infections in a matter of 6 months. Although the genome of this novel viral RNA was sequenced quickly and testing kits were manufactured to assist in combatting COVID-19, the diagnosis and treatment will remain relatively unsuccessful until the pathology of this disease is fully understood. Histotechnology plays an important role in understanding the pathology of many diseases, including COVID-19. The first postmortem biopsy of a COVID-19 patient was collected on 27 January 2020, and the pathology finding was published in mid-February 2020. Since then, more studies have been published in scientific literatures as the global outbreak continues. This mini-review summarizes the published articles in which histotechnology aspects were utilized with the intent to understand the pathology of COVID-19. In addition, it is anticipated there will be more molecular and immunohistochemical studies to further understand the mechanism of the disease in the near future.

Etiological and pathophysiological enigmas of severe coronavirus disease 2019, multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children, and Kawasaki disease

“…In addition, animal studies and post-mortem pathological studies of severe viral pneumonia revealed that few intact virions in extensively injured organ tissues and only occasional PCR or histochemical antibody positivivity. [63][64][65] Thus, it is a reasonable assumption that the etiological substances in pneumonia and ARDS in viral infections are produced by certain pathogen-infected cells rather than the pathogen itself. If SARS-CoV-2 is responsible for acute lung injury, researchers should identify the pathogens via lung tap and/or pleural effusion instead of those from the upper or lower respiratory tracts such as nasopharyngeal swab or bronchial lavage fluid, and through a culture method rather than PCR assay.…”

“…These findings suggest that the etiologic substances of pneumonia and ARDS could be related to the substances derived from the host cells by physical injury or other conditions. In addition, animal studies and postmortem pathological studies of severe viral pneumonia revealed that few intact virions in extensively injured organ tissues and only occasional PCR or histochemical antibody positivity [ 63 - 65 ]. Majority of affected subjects might be PCR negative in the blood even in severe cases.…”