Analysis of deaths during the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic in Singapore: challenges in determining a SARS diagnosis.

CONTEXT

An outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), an infectious disease attributed to a novel coronavirus, occurred in Singapore during the first quarter of 2003 and led to 204 patients with diagnosed illnesses and 26 deaths by May 2, 2003. Twenty-one percent of these patients required admission to the medical intensive care unit. During this period, the Center for Forensic Medicine, Health Sciences Authority, Singapore, performed a total of 14 postmortem examinations for probable and suspected SARS. Of these, a total of 8 were later confirmed as SARS infections.

OBJECTIVE

Our series documents the difficulties encountered at autopsy during the initial phases of the SARS epidemic, when the pattern of infection and definitive diagnostic laboratory criteria were yet to be established.

DESIGN

Autopsies were performed by pathologists affiliated with the Center for Forensic Medicine, Health Sciences Authority, Singapore. Tissue was accessed and read at the Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore, and at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington, DC. Autopsy tissue was submitted to the Virology Department, Singapore General Hospital, for analysis, and in situ hybridization for the SARS coronavirus was carried out at the National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Tokyo, Japan.

RESULTS

Thirteen of 14 patients showed features of diffuse alveolar damage. In 8 patients, no precipitating etiology was identified, and in all of these patients, we now have laboratory confirmation of coronavirus infection. Two of the 8 patients presented at autopsy as sudden unexpected deaths, while the remaining 6 patients had been hospitalized with varying lengths of stay in the intensive care unit. In 3 patients, including the 2 sudden unexpected deaths, in situ hybridization showed the presence of virally infected cells within the lung. In 4 of the 8 SARS patients, pulmonary thromboemboli were also recognized on gross examination, while one patient had marantic cardiac valvular vegetations.

CONCLUSIONS

It is unfortunate that the term atypical pneumonia has been used in conjunction with SARS. Although nonspecific by itself, the term does not accurately reflect the underlying dangers of viral pneumonia, which may progress rapidly to acute respiratory distress syndrome. We observed that the clinical spectrum of disease as seen in our autopsy series included sudden deaths. This is a worrisome finding that illustrates that viral diseases will have a spectrum of clinical presentations and that the diagnoses made for such patients must incorporate laboratory as well as clinical data.