ArticleBiomedicines2025
Quantification of Myocardial Biomarkers in Sudden Cardiac Deaths Using a Rapid Immunofluorescence Method for Simultaneous Biomarker Analysis.
Article in Biomedicines, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Smartphone-Enabled Point-of-Care Biosensing Platform With Self-Calibration for Rapid Matrix-Resistant Detection of Multiple AMI Biomarkers in Whole Blood.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Article
- Death in Epilepsy: Ictogenic Vs. Cardiogenic Mechanisms and Immunoassays in Postmortem Interval Estimation - Case Report.Maedica · 2026Article
- Post-Mortem Biomarkers in Sudden Cardiac Death: From Classical Biochemistry to Molecular Autopsy and Multi-Omics Forensic Approaches.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Rapid Biochemical Analysis of Postmortem Serum and Myocardial Homogenates-An Exploratory Study.Biomolecules · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesDifferential diagnosis of sudden cardiac death (SCD) remains challenging, particularly in cases lacking evident structural abnormalities. Cardiac markers have been proposed as useful tools for this differentiation in forensic contexts. However, key issues include the influence of postmortem interval (PMI) on marker stability and the limitations of traditional approaches that focus on pericardial fluid, which requires invasive sampling compared to peripheral blood. This study aimed to evaluate the potential of cardiac markers in peripheral blood for diagnosing SCD, addressing methodological concerns related to PMI, hemolysis, and sample handling.
methodsThis study analyzed 5 cardiac markers (creatine kinase-MB [CK-MB], myoglobin, troponin I [TnI], BNP, and D-dimer) in peripheral blood samples from 42 autopsied cadavers, divided into an SCD group and a control group. Marker levels were quantified using immunofluorescence, with cases meticulously selected to exclude confounding factors such as chronic diseases, pulmonary thromboembolism, and drowning. The study also accounted for potential degradation due to PMI, and evaluated the accuracy of point-of-care testing (POCT) in forensic samples.
resultsThe study identified statistically significant differences in myoglobin and TnI levels between the SCD group and the control group, though myoglobin's diagnostic reliability remains limited due to its lack of specificity for myocardial injury. TnI emerged as a more robust marker for SCD. Contrary to prior concerns, PMI showed no significant correlation with marker levels in samples handled without freeze-thaw cycles. Issues related to hemolysis were addressed, and no significant effects were observed from resuscitation maneuvers.
conclusionsThis study supports the potential use of cardiac markers, particularly TnI, in peripheral blood for postmortem SCD diagnosis, emphasizing the importance of rapid and systematic analysis to minimize hemolysis-related variability. While further validation is needed to confirm these findings, this approach offers a less invasive, economical, and practical method for forensic investigations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.