Diatom Analysis in Drowning: A Critical Review of Reliability, Contamination, and Medico-Legal Interpretation

The diagnosis of fatal drowning remains one of the most challenging tasks in forensic pathology, as no single autopsy finding is pathognomonic, and interpretation relies on the integration of scene information, circumstances, and ancillary investigations. Among supportive tests, diatom analysis has been used for decades, yet its medico-legal value continues to be debated due to methodological heterogeneity, contamination risks, and inconsistent interpretive frameworks. This review critically examines diatom evidence in drowning from a comparative and fit-for-purpose perspective, focusing on mechanistic plausibility, alternative non-drowning explanations, and methodological blind spots that undermine evidentiary reliability. Conventional microscopy-based diatom testing and emerging DNA-based and metagenomic approaches are compared with respect to what they detect, how contamination may arise, and how results are currently interpreted in forensic casework. Particular emphasis is placed on low-count diatom findings in closed organs, where recent evidence demonstrates substantial vulnerability to laboratory, consumable, and postmortem contamination. Drawing on recent systematic syntheses, controlled postmortem studies, and newly identified contamination sources, this review argues that mechanistic plausibility does not equate to forensic reliability. Diatom findings are best interpreted as supportive evidence whose weight depends on explicit contamination control, transparent reporting, and alignment with a clearly defined medico-legal proposition. To address persistent comparability and interpretation gaps, a minimum reporting dataset, minimum contamination-control principles, and a decision-oriented interpretive framework are proposed. In conclusion, diatom testing should neither be regarded as definitive proof nor dismissed outright. When applied selectively and interpreted within a contamination-aware, proposition-driven framework, diatom evidence may contribute meaningfully to drowning diagnosis and drowning-site inference, while avoiding overstatement of its probative value.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cureus
Published
2026-01-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.100870
Primary Topic
Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Diatom Analysis in Drowning: A Critical Review of Reliability, Contamination, and Medico-Legal Interpretation

Zayed A. Alharbi, Lama N AlJohani, Sultan M Alhazmi, Abdulkreem Al-Juhani et al.
Cureus
Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
article

Diatom Analysis in Drowning: A Critical Review of Reliability, Contamination, and Medico-Legal Interpretation

Zayed A. Alharbi, Lama N AlJohani, Sultan M Alhazmi, Abdulkreem Al-Juhani, Yamen Gutob, Rami A Choghari, Omar Ba Mhel, Faisal N Shata, Aseel A Qashar, Basem Basudan, Abdullah S Al-Najjar
article en

Abstract

The diagnosis of fatal drowning remains one of the most challenging tasks in forensic pathology, as no single autopsy finding is pathognomonic, and interpretation relies on the integration of scene information, circumstances, and ancillary investigations. Among supportive tests, diatom analysis has been used for decades, yet its medico-legal value continues to be debated due to methodological heterogeneity, contamination risks, and inconsistent interpretive frameworks. This review critically examines diatom evidence in drowning from a comparative and fit-for-purpose perspective, focusing on mechanistic plausibility, alternative non-drowning explanations, and methodological blind spots that undermine evidentiary reliability. Conventional microscopy-based diatom testing and emerging DNA-based and metagenomic approaches are compared with respect to what they detect, how contamination may arise, and how results are currently interpreted in forensic casework. Particular emphasis is placed on low-count diatom findings in closed organs, where recent evidence demonstrates substantial vulnerability to laboratory, consumable, and postmortem contamination. Drawing on recent systematic syntheses, controlled postmortem studies, and newly identified contamination sources, this review argues that mechanistic plausibility does not equate to forensic reliability. Diatom findings are best interpreted as supportive evidence whose weight depends on explicit contamination control, transparent reporting, and alignment with a clearly defined medico-legal proposition. To address persistent comparability and interpretation gaps, a minimum reporting dataset, minimum contamination-control principles, and a decision-oriented interpretive framework are proposed. In conclusion, diatom testing should neither be regarded as definitive proof nor dismissed outright. When applied selectively and interpreted within a contamination-aware, proposition-driven framework, diatom evidence may contribute meaningfully to drowning diagnosis and drowning-site inference, while avoiding overstatement of its probative value.

CureusVol. 18(1)
King Abdulaziz University (SA), Umm al-Qura University (SA), Institute of Forensic Science (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 97%
Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.