Paramedic Papers

Home Cardiac arrest Post-arrest biomarker platforms don't agree

Cardiac arrest

Post-arrest biomarker platforms don't agree

Quantification of blood-based neurovascular unit biomarkers: an analytical platform comparison study
Resuscitation Plus · Added 22 September 2026

Platform-comparison study of post-arrest HIBI biomarkers (GFAP, Nf-L, tau, UCH-L1) — lab-grade analyser results correlated highly with each other, but the point-of-care i-STAT agreed poorly, so prognostication thresholds can't be shared across devices

Study type
Cohort
Design
Post hoc cross-platform analytical comparison within a prospective observational cohort
Participants
32 critically ill patients after withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy
Main finding
GFAP, Nf-L, tau and UCH-L1 highly correlated between Simoa HD-X and ARGO HT (all r ≥ 0.97), but i-STAT Alinity agreement was poor-to-moderate for GFAP (ICC 0.25) and poor-to-good for UCH-L1 (ICC 0.60)
Caveat
Small sample and post hoc design; not a clinical outcome study
Bottom line
Context only

Why it matters in Australia (Medium relevance). transferability — prognostication happens hospital-side after ACTAS transports ROSC patients (CMG 4A) — useful background on why biomarker numbers aren't portable, not road-practice changing

Learning goal

Weigh the reliability of point-of-care biomarkers for neurological prognostication after cardiac arrest.

Open in dashboard Read the paper (DOI) PubMed

More

Related papers on Cardiac arrest