Diabetes mellitus type 2 (T2D) is a chronic metabolic disease with a great impact on health status and quality of life (QoL) in terms of physical, social, and psychological well-being. The aim of the present study was to measure diabetes-dependent QoL and affecting factors in patients with T2D. Study population was consisted by 258 subjects with T2D attending diabetic outpatient clinics of General Hospitals of Piraeus “Tzaneio” and Nikaia “Ag.Panteleimon” during September–December 2014. The Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life questionnaire was carried out in all study participants. Diabetes mellitus type 2 had a negative impact to QoL in 37.3 % of the study participants while 32.9 % believed that their life would have been better without the presence of T2D. Diabetes had negative impact on working life (−1.3 ± 0.6), health status (−1.3 ± 0.2), family (−1.3 ± 0.6) and sexual life (−1.3 ± 0.3), future perspectives (−1.3 ± 0.4) and dietary habits (−1.7 ± 0.2). The results of logistic regression analysis showed that QoL was related with age [odds ratio (OR) 0.94, 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) 0.91–1.98, P = 0.008] and marital status (OR 0.43, 95 %CIs 0.21–0.90, P = 0.03). The results of the present study showed that T2D per se has a negative impact to patient’s QoL most of all affecting working life, health status, family and sexual life, future perspectives and dietary habits. Age and marital status were the only determinants of QoL.

To evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of liraglutide versus sitagliptin or exenatide, added to oral antidiabetic drug mono- or combination therapy respectively, in patients with Type 2 diabetes in Greece. The CORE Diabetes Model, a validated computer simulation model, was adapted to the Greek healthcare setting. Patient and intervention effects data were gathered from a clinical trial comparing liraglutide 1.2 mg once daily vs. sitagliptin 100 mg once daily, both combined with metformin, and a clinical trial comparing liraglutide 1.8 mg once daily vs. exenatide 10 μg twice daily, both as add-on to metformin, glimepiride or both. Direct costs were reported in 2013 Euros and calculated based on published and local sources. All future outcomes were discounted at 3.5% per annum, and the analysis was conducted from the perspective of a third-party payer in Greece. Over a patient’s lifetime, treatment with liraglutide 1.2 mg vs. sitagliptin drove a mean increase in discounted life expectancy of 0.13 (SD 0.23) years and in discounted quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.19 (0.16) quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), whereas therapy with liraglutide 1.8 mg vs. exenatide yielded increases of 0.14 (0.23) years and 0.19 (0.16) QALYs respectively. As regards lifetime direct costs, liraglutide 1.2 mg resulted in greater costs of €2797 (€1468) versus sitagliptin, and so did liraglutide 1.8 mg compared with exenatide (€1302 [€1492]). Liraglutide 1.2 and 1.8 mg doses were associated with incremental cost effectiveness ratios of €15101 and €6818 per QALY gained, respectively. Liraglutide is likely to be a cost-effective option for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes in a Greek setting.

Sepsis and septic shock are life-threatening emergencies associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Hence, early diagnosis and management of both conditions is of paramount importance. Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a cost-effective and safe imaging modality performed at the bedside, which has rapidly emerged as an excellent multimodal tool and has been gradually incorporated as an adjunct to physical examination in order to facilitate evaluation, diagnosis and management. In sepsis, POCUS can assist in the evaluation of undifferentiated sepsis, while, in cases of shock, it can contribute to the differential diagnosis of other types of shock, thus facilitating the decision-making process. Other potential benefits of POCUS include prompt identification and control of the source of infection, as well as close haemodynamic and treatment monitoring. The aim of this review is to determine and highlight the role of POCUS in the evaluation, diagnosis, treatment and monitoring of the septic patient. Future research should focus on developing and implementing a well-defined algorithmic approach for the POCUS-guided management of sepsis in the emergency department setting given its unequivocal utility as a multimodal tool for the overall evaluation and management of the septic patient.

The point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has been effectively used in intensive care units for the management of septic patients. Since it is a time- and cost-effective non-invasive imaging modality, its use in the emergency department (ED) has been advocated for by medical experts. This review summarizes the existing literature regarding the breadth of POCUS as a supplementary tool to the holistic approach of septic patients in the ED setting. A literature search was conducted via PubMed (MEDLINE), Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases, analyzing studies which examined the use of POCUS in the ED for non-traumatic, septic, and/or undifferentiated hypotensive patients, resulting in 26 studies. The first cluster of studies investigates the efficiency of POCUS protocols in the differential diagnosis and its reliability for distributive/septic shock and sepsis management. In the second cluster, POCUS use results in faster sepsis cause identification and improves therapeutic management. The third cluster confirms that POCUS aids in the accurate diagnosis and management, even in rare and complicated cases. The results of the present review support the well-documented utility of POCUS and highlight the importance of POCUS incorporation in the comprehensive management of the septic patient in the ED setting.

Early recognition and timely treatment of sepsis and septic shock is vital. Despite appropriate management, mortality and morbidity rates remain high. In recent years, many of the research efforts have been directed towards finding novel biomarkers that would rapidly identify, classify and risk-stratify the severity of sepsis in order to achieve prompt and targeted treatment of patients with sepsis and septic shock. Among these biomarkers, adrenomedullin (ADM) in the form of the biologically active fragment (bio-ADM) and dipeptidyl peptidase 3 (DPP3) have recently been in the spotlight. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize current evidence on these two novel biomarkers regarding their clinical utility in diagnosis, prognosis, treatment monitoring and therapy guidance of sepsis and septic shock in the emergency department (ED) and in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. Bio-ADM seems to be a promising biomarker with respect to the overall management of sepsis (diagnosis, severity prediction, prognosis and treatment monitoring and guidance). On the other hand, DPP3 appears to be useful mainly for sepsis prognosis and for predicting sepsis-induced acute kidney injury. Given their potential clinical utility in sepsis management, the use of these two novel biomarkers, in conjunction with established biomarkers and clinical scores, could lead to the application of refined integrated protocols in the ED and the ICU, which could promptly and effectively inform clinical decision-making in patients presenting with sepsis or septic shock.

Major bleeding is a life-threatening condition with high morbidity and mortality. Trauma, gastrointestinal bleeding, haemoptysis, intracranial haemorrhage or other causes of bleeding represent major concerns in the Emergency Department (ED), especially when complicated by haemodynamic instability. Severity and source of bleeding, comorbidities, and prior use of anticoagulants are pivotal factors affecting both the clinical status and the patients’ differential response to haemorrhage. Thus, risk stratification is fundamental in the initial assessment of patients with bleeding. Aggressive resuscitation is the principal step for achieving haemodynamic stabilization of the patient, which will further allow appropriate interventions to be made for the definite control of bleeding. Overall management of major bleeding in the ED should follow a holistic individualized approach which includes haemodynamic stabilization, repletion of volume and blood loss, and reversal of coagulopathy and identification of the source of bleeding. The aim of the present practical guide is to provide an update on recent epidemiological data about the most common etiologies of bleeding and summarize the latest evidence regarding the bundles of care for the management of patients with major bleeding of traumatic or non-traumatic etiology in the ED.