Background: Providing individualised healthcare in line with patient wishes is a particular challenge for emergency healthcare professionals. Documentation of patient wishes (DPW), e.g. as advance directives, can guide clinicians in making end-of-life decisions that respect the patient’s wishes and autonomy. However, patient centered decisions are hindered by limited availability of DPWs in emergency settings. Objective: This systematic review aims to congregate present data on recorded rates for DPW existence and availability in the emergency department (ED) as well as contributing factors for these rates. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Google Scholar, Embase and Web of Science databases in September 2023. Publications providing primary quantitative data on DPW in the ED were assessed. Publications referring only to a subset of ED patients (other than geriatric) and investigating DPW issued after admission were excluded. Results: A total of 22 studies from 1996 to 2021 were included in the analysis. Most were from the US (n = 12), followed by Australia (n = 4), Canada (n = 2), South Korea, Germany, the United Kingdom and Switzerland (n = 1 each). In the general adult population presenting to the ED, 19.9–27.8% of patients reported having some form of DPW, but only in 6.8% or less it was available on presentation. In the geriatric population, DPW rates (2.6–79%) as well as their availability (1.1–48.8%) varied widely. The following variables were identified as positive predictors of having DPW, among others: higher age, poorer overall health, as well as sociodemographic factors, such as female gender, having children, being in a relationship, higher level of education or a recent previous presentation to hospital. Conclusions: Existence and availability of a recorded DPW among ED patients was low in general and even in geriatric populations mostly well below 50%. While we were able to gather data on prevalence and predictors, this was limited by heterogeneous data. We believe further research is needed to explore the quality of DPW and measures to increase both rates of existence and availability of DPW in the ED.

Background: We evaluated how plasma proteomic signatures in patients with suspected COVID-19 can unravel the pathophysiology, and determine kinetics and clinical outcome of the infection. Methods: Plasma samples from patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with symptoms of COVID-19 were stratified into: (1) patients with suspected COVID-19 that was not confirmed (n = 44); (2) non-hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 (n = 44); (3) hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 (n = 53) with variable outcome; and (4) patients presenting to the ED with minor diseases unrelated to SARS-CoV-2 infection (n = 20). Besides standard of care diagnostics, 177 circulating proteins related to inflammation and cardiovascular disease were analyzed using proximity extension assay (PEA, Olink) technology. Results: Comparative proteome analysis revealed 14 distinct proteins as highly associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection and 12 proteins with subsequent hospitalization (p < 0.001). ADM, IL-6, MCP-3, TRAIL-R2, and PD-L1 were each predictive for death (AUROC curve 0.80–0.87). The consistent increase of these markers, from hospital admission to intensive care and fatality, supported the concept that these proteins are of major clinical relevance. Conclusions: We identified distinct plasma proteins linked to the presence and course of COVID-19. These plasma proteomic findings may translate to a protein fingerprint, helping to assist clinical management decisions.

Background/Objectives: Acute intermittent porphyria (AIP) is a metabolic disease characterised by neurovisceral crises with episodes of acute abdominal pain alongside life-altering, and often hidden, chronic symptoms. The elimination of precipitating factors, hemin therapy, and pain relief are strategies used to treat porphyria symptoms, but are often reserved for patients suffering recurrent, acute attacks. Givosiran (siRNA) is an emerging AIP therapy capable of silencing delta-aminolevulinic acid synthase-1 (ALAS1) and, in turn, reducing the accumulation of delta-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) and porphobilinogen (PBG) that precede porphyria symptoms. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of givosiran administration in patients with both acute and chronic AIP burden, who were poorly responsive to current therapies, using a personalised medicine approach. Methods: Real-world data were collected in consecutive patients treated with givosiran at an accredited German Porphyria Clinical Center. Biochemical, clinical, and HR-QoL outcomes were monitored alongside adverse events (AEs). Results: Twenty-eight patients treated between 2018 and 2024 were sub-categorised into groups corresponding to Ipnet terms 13 ‘Sporadic Attacks, 5 ‘Symptomatic High Excretors’, 5 ‘Prophylactic Heme’, and 5 “Recurrent Attacks’. The mean time from diagnosis to treatment was 9.2 years (range in months 1–324), and the mean duration of treatment was 30 months (range 3–68). After 6 months of monthly givosiran injection (2.5 mg/kg), all patients’ ALA levels reached <2ULN, and 60% of patients attained PBG levels < 2ULN (p < 0.001). These biochemical responses were not different between sub-groups (p > 0.05). Clinically, 75% of patients’ chronic and acute porphyria symptoms improved. The total patient populations’ annualised attack ratio (AAR) improved; Historical AAR: 2.9 (0–12.0) vs. Givo AAR: 0.45 (0–3.0) (p < 0.01). During follow-up, nine patients experienced minor breakthrough episodes. Of these, three patients required hemin infusion. An association between clinical success and a shorter interim period between diagnosis and treatment was evident (r = −0.522, p = 0.0061). All patients’ indices of HR-QoL improved under givosiran, including mental health (38%, p < 0.0001) and pain (38%, p < 0.0001). Patient-reported health (givosiran 77.9% vs. baseline 37.1%, p < 0.0001) and clinical outcome scores (86.9%: good–very good) were also positive. Two patients withdrew from treatment <6 months, citing fatigue, which was a common side effect. A mild elevation in liver enzymes (AST and/or ALT < 1.5ULN, 15.4%) and reduced glomerular filtration rates (GFR, 11.5%) were also evident, but no life-threatening adverse events (AEs) were attributed to givosiran treatment. Conclusions: Givosiran is effective in preventing severe acute attacks and reducing the chronic health burden in patients with acute intermittent porphyria. Importantly, HR-QoL improved in patients suffering chronic AIP burden with few incidences of historical attacks. All patients experienced substantially improved mental health, ease of living, and self-perceived health.

Accurate diagnosis of sepsis is needed to initiate life-saving treatment decisions. Biomarkers capable of identifying both acute infection and sepsis are required to assist clinicians. A real-life heterogeneous cohort of 388 patients with suspected acute infections was recruited at presentation to the ED. Nine emerging host-response biomarkers (MyD88, MMP-8, leptin, ENA-78, fractalkine, PD- L1, pentraxin-3, TRAIL, and GLP-1) were quantified using a multiparameter assay. We performed AUROC analysis for the endpoints bacterial infection, sepsis, and 30-day mortality. We further assessed diagnostic performance when combining these biomarkers using a machine learning algorithm. Particularly, MyD88, PD-L1, and pentraxin-3 presented high AUROCs for the endpoints bacterial infection (≥0.87), sepsis (≥0.81), and 30-day mortality (≥0.71). Seven out of the nine investigated biomarkers showed statistically significant discrimination for all three endpoints. A combined algorithm via the XGBoost model using pentraxin-3, MyD88, and GLP-1 was used for sepsis prediction, with an AUROC of 0.89, higher than clinical assessment via NEWS-2 (0.83) or procalcitonin (0.81). Pentraxin-3, MyD88, GLP-1, and PD-L1 are a promising complementary set of biomarkers for risk assessment and stratification. When a trained multiparameter classifier is used, the combination of biomarkers results in a valid tool for sepsis diagnosis. DRKS00020521, DRKS00017395.

Background: Acute porphyrias (APs) are a group of rare metabolic diseases related to a disturbed heme biosynthesis. Symptoms may first occur as life threatening attacks, comprising abdominal pain and/or variable neuro-psychiatric symptoms, thus leading to presentation in emergency departments (ED) first. Due to the low prevalence, diagnosis of AP is often missed, even after readmission to the ED. Therefore, strategies are needed to consider APs in ED patients with unexplained abdominal pain, especially since early and adequate treatment will avoid an unfavorable clinical course. Aim of this prospective study was to investigate the prevalence of APs in ED patients and thus, addressing feasibility of screening for rare diseases, such as APs in the real life setting.Methods: From September 2019 to March 2021, patients presenting to the ED of three German tertiary care hospitals with moderate to severe prolonged abdominal pain (Visual Analog Scale, VAS > 4 out of 10 points) not otherwise explained were screened and prospectively enrolled. In addition to standard of care (SOC) diagnostics a blood and urine sample for plasma fluorescence scan and biochemical porphyrin analysis were sent to a certified German porphyria laboratory.Results: Overall, of 653 screened patients, 68 patients (36 females; mean age 36 years) were included for biochemical porphyrin analysis. No patient with AP was detected. The most frequent discharge diagnoses included “abdominal and digestive symptoms” (n = 22, 32%), “gastrooesophageal diseases” (n = 18, 27%), “infectious bowel disease” (n = 6, 9%) and “biliopancreatic diseases” (n = 6, 9%). Although not primarily addressed, we observed an increase in knowledge of the ED staffs at all study sites regarding our screening algorithm and thus, awareness for APs.Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, we performed the first prospective screening project for APs in the ED. Although we detected no patient with AP in this study, we demonstrated the feasibility of a multicenter screening process for APs by building up a well-working infrastructure comprising laboratory testing as well as data management. This enables the set-up of a larger scale revised follow-up study with a central focus on structured education, thus, possibly acting as blueprint for other rare diseases.

Background: Acute infections and sepsis are a leading cause of death. These patients are primarily encountered at the emergency department (ED), where early assessment for sepsis is necessary to improve outcome. In sepsis, the inflammatory response causes several characteristic pathophysiological changes, including a dysregulated and generalized activation of the endothelium. This study aimed to analyze endothelial markers released to the blood as diagnostic biomarkers for acute infection and sepsis in the ED, as smaller studies have previously shown promising results in other settings. Methods: Serum samples from n = 312 adult patients with suspected acute infections at presentation to the ED were utilized. Patients’ courses of disease and outcomes were assessed by clinical adjudication. E-selectin, P-selectin, ICAM-1, and VCAM-1 were measured by ELISAs. The accuracy of each marker for predicting bacterial infection, sepsis, and in-hospital mortality was evaluated. Results: For sepsis, E-selectin and ICAM-1 both showed an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) of 0.62, lower than procalcitonin with 0.77 (both P < 0.01) and lactate with 0.73 (P = 0.030 and 0.046, respectively), but similar to CRP with 0.60 (P = 0.758 and 0.876, respectively). For 28-day in-hospital mortality among patients with infection, ICAM-1 performed best with an AUROC of 0.75. Conclusions: Despite promising results in small studies and specific cohorts, particularly in intensive care units, this large-scale evaluation of four endothelial biomarkers highlights their limited diagnostic utility in a broader inclusion setup design at the earliest possible time point of evaluation.