Acute heart failure in elderly patients admitted to the emergency department with acute dyspnea: a multimarker approach diagnostic study.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Diagnosing acute heart failure (AHF) is difficult in elderly patients presenting with acute dyspnea to the emergency department. OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of NT-proBNP, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin-I (Hs-cTnI), soluble ST2 (ST2), galectin-3 and CD146 alone and in combination for diagnosing AHF in elderly patients presenting with acute dyspnea to the emergency department. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a prospective, multicenter study performed between September 2016 and January 2020, including elderly patients presenting with acute dyspnea to the emergency department of 6 French hospitals. INTERVENTION: Measurement of NT-proBNP, hs-cTnI, ST2, galectin-3 and CD146. OUTCOME MEASURE AND ANALYSIS: The reference standard, AHF, was adjudicated by two independent physicians based on ED and hospitalization clinical, biological (excluding biomarkers), radiological and echocardiography data (performed by a cardiologist in the cardiology department specifically for this study). Three exploratory methods (two using a cross-sectional approach with logistic regression and counting all biomarker combinations, and one using a sequential approach with gray zone optimizations) were applied to create comprehensive combinations of the 5 biomarkers for measuring diagnostic accuracy. MAIN RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-eight patients (median age of 85 years, IQR = 8) were analyzed, and 110 (46%) were diagnosed with AHF. The accuracies of NT-proBNP, CD146, hs-cTnI, galectin-3, and ST2 were 0.72 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-0.77], 0.63 (95% CI 0.57-0.69), 0.59 (95% CI 0.53-0.65), 0.55 (95% CI 0.49-0.61) and 0.51 (95% CI 0.45-0.57), respectively. Regardless of the approach used or how the 5 biomarkers were combined, the best accuracy for diagnosing AHF (0.73, 95% CI 0.67-0.78) did not differ from that of NT-proBNP alone. CONCLUSION: In this study, NT-proBNP alone exhibited the best diagnostic accuracy for diagnosing AHF in elderly patients presenting with acute dyspnea to the emergency departments. None of the other biomarkers alone or combined improved the accuracy compared to NT-proBNP, which is the only biomarker to use in this setting.

MEESSI-AHF score to estimate short-term prognosis of acute heart failure patients in the Emergency Department: a prospective and multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The assessment of acute heart failure (AHF) prognosis is primordial in emergency setting. Although AHF management is exhaustively codified using mortality predictors, there is currently no recommended scoring system for assessing prognosis. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) recommends a comprehensive assessment of global AHF prognosis, considering in-hospital mortality, early rehospitalization rates and the length of hospital stay. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to prospectively evaluate the performance of the Multiple Estimation of risk based on the Emergency department Spanish Score In patients with AHF (MEESSI-AHF) score in estimating short prognosis according to the ESC guidelines. DESIGN, SETTINGS AND PATIENTS: A multicenter study was conducted between November 2020, and June 2021. Adult patients who presented to eleven French hospitals for AHF were prospectively included. OUTCOME MEASURES AND ANALYSIS: According to MEESSI-AHF score, patients were stratified in four categories corresponding to mortality risk: low-, intermediate-, high- and very high-risk groups. The primary outcome was the number of days alive and out of the hospital during the 30-day period following admission to the Emergency Department (ED). RESULTS: In total, 390 patients were included. The number of days alive and out of the hospital decreased significatively with increasing MEESSI-AHF risk groups, ranging from 21.2 days (20.3-22.3 days) for the low-risk, 20 days (19.3-20.5 days) for intermediate risk,18.6 days (17.6-19.6 days) for the high-risk and 17.9 days (16.9-18.9 days) very high-risk category. CONCLUSION: Among patients admitted to ED for an episode of AHF, the MEESSI-AHF score estimates with good performance the number of days alive and out of the hospital.

Imaging strategies used in emergency departments for the diagnostic workup of COVID-19 patients during the first wave of the pandemic: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency departments (EDs) were on the front line for the diagnostic workup of patients with COVID-19-like symptoms during the first wave. Chest imaging was the key to rapidly identifying COVID-19 before administering RT-PCR, which was time-consuming. The objective of our study was to compare the costs and organizational benefits of triage strategies in ED during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study in five EDs in France, involving 3712 consecutive patients consulting with COVID-like symptoms between 9 March 2020 and 8 April 2020, to assess the cost effectiveness of imaging strategies (chest radiography, chest computed tomography (CT) scan in the presence of respiratory symptoms, systematic ultra-low-dose (ULD) chest CT, and no systematic imaging) on ED length of stay (LOS) in the ED and on hospital costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated as the difference in costs divided by the difference in LOS. RESULTS: Compared with chest radiography, workup with systematic ULD chest CT was the more cost-effective strategy (average LOS of 6.89 hours; average cost of €3646), allowing for an almost 4-hour decrease in LOS in the ED at a cost increase of €98 per patient. Chest radiography (extendedly dominated) and RT-PCR with no systematic imaging were the least effective strategies, with an average LOS of 10.8 hours. The strategy of chest CT in the presence of respiratory symptoms was more effective than the systematic ULD chest CT strategy, with the former providing a gain of 37 minutes at an extra cost of €718. DISCUSSION: Systematic ULD chest CT for patients with COVID-like symptoms in the ED is a cost-effective strategy and should be considered to improve the management of patients in the ED during the pandemic, given the need to triage patients.