Citation

Lunetta P, Miettinen A, Spilling K, Sajantila A. Leg. Med. (Elsevier) 2013; 15(5): 229-234.

Affiliation

Department of Forensic Medicine, Hjelt Institute, University of Helsinki, Finland. Electronic address: philippe.lunetta@helsinki.fi.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2013, Japanese Society of Legal Medicine, Publisher Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.legalmed.2013.03.002

PMID

23701706

Abstract

The main criticism of the validity of the diatom test for the diagnosis of drowning is based on the potential ante- and post-mortem penetration of diatoms and the finding of diatoms in bodies of non-drowned human beings. However, qualitative and quantitative studies on diatoms in organs of the non-drowned have yielded both conflicting and contradictory results. In the present study, we have analysed under standardised methods the diatom content in several organs of 14 non-drowned human bodies. Overall, only 9 diatoms (6 entire, 3 fragmented) were disclosed in 6 of the 14 non-drowned bodies. Each of these 6 cadavers had only a single "positive" organ. Six diatoms were found in the bone marrow, 2 in the lung, and one in the pleural liquid. No diatoms were recovered from the brain, liver, kidney, or blood samples of any of these 14 bodies. Moreover, in five additional cadavers, whose lungs were injected, prior autopsy, with a 3.5L solution containing a bi-cellulate diatom culture (Thalassiosira baltica, Thalassiosira levanderi) via tracheostomy, a few diatoms appeared in the pleural cavity and in the blood from the left heart chamber, but none in any other internal organs investigated. The results of the presented study demonstrate that the issue of the false-positive diatom test should not be a logical impediment to the performance of the diatom method. However, strict and standardized protocols aimed at avoiding contamination during sample preparation must be used, appropriate separation values set and taxonomic analysis of all diatoms performed.

Language: en