ReviewInternational journal of legal medicine2026
Immunohistochemical markers for dating cardiac conduction system injury: current knowledge and forensic implications.
Review in International journal of legal medicine, 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
The postmortem timing of myocardial injury remains a major challenge in forensic pathology, particularly when conventional histological methods are insufficient during the early hours after an ischemic insult. We conducted a critical narrative review of immunohistochemical markers for myocardial injury dating, focusing on their biological applicability to the cardiac conduction system (CCS). The search was performed using PubMed and Scopus; no date restriction was applied. Over the past three decades, markers including complement components (C5b-9), cardiac troponins, fibronectin, and connexin 43 have been investigated, with varying degrees of validation, for injury dating in working ventricular myocardium. However, the CCS - comprising the sinoatrial node, atrioventricular node, bundle of His, and Purkinje fibers - is a histologically and molecularly distinct tissue that has received remarkably little attention in this context. We highlight fundamental differences in cellular composition, connexin expression profiles, extracellular matrix content, and baseline protein abundance between conduction and ventricular tissue that are likely to significantly alter marker behavior and temporal kinetics. The direct application of ventricular-based immunohistochemical timelines to the CCS lacks empirical support and may lead to forensic misinterpretation. The medico-legal implications are potentially significant, as accurate timing of conduction system injury is relevant to cases of sudden unexplained death, drug-induced arrhythmias, blunt cardiac trauma, and medical negligence litigation. Systematic, tissue-specific validation studies are urgently needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42911401What 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.