ReviewPediatric cardiology2026
Brain Biomarkers in Pediatric Cardiac Disease: A Scoping Review of the Literature from 1998 to 2026.
Review in Pediatric cardiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This scoping review characterizes the relationship of blood brain biomarkers (BBM) to outcomes in pediatric congenital heart disease (CHD) and pediatric cardiac arrest (CA). PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched on 9/25/23 and again on 1/7/26 for literature on pediatric populations with brain injury and CHD and/or CA. Inclusion criteria were: (1) human pediatric subjects ≤ 18 years of age who have CHD and/or underwent CA, (2) BBM. Exclusion criteria were: (1) adult populations, (2) studies without BBM, (3) inflammatory or imaging biomarkers. This review is reported following the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) and conducted following a study protocol developed in line with the PRISMA-P reporting guidelines. A total of 3687 articles were screened by a minimum of two reviewers; 87 were included in this review. All studies incorporated at least 1 of 13 included BBM with the most frequent being S100B (n = 53, 60.9%), GFAP (n = 27, 31.0%), and NSE (n = 32, 36.8%). 51.7% included neurologic imaging/monitoring (n = 45/87), and 49.4% specified neurodevelopmental/neurofunctional testing within neurologic outcome analysis (n = 43/87). 67.4% of studies reporting neurodevelopmental/functional testing observed a correlation between BBM and poor neurologic outcome (n = 29/43). BBM show promise in predicting neurologic outcomes in pediatric patients following cardiac arrest and in the setting of surgical procedures and other interventions for CHD patients. Due to the limited number of studies, further research is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42360427What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.