Abstract
Delirium represents a significant healthcare burden, diagnosed in over two million elderly Americans each year. In the surgical population, delirium remains the most common complication among elderly patients and is associated with longer hospital stays, higher costs of care, increased mortality and functional impairment. The pathomechanism of disease is poorly understood, with current diagnostic approaches somewhat subjective and arbitrary, and definitive diagnostic biomarkers are currently lacking. Despite the recent interest in delirium research, biomarker discovery for it remains new. Most attempts to discover biomarkers are targeted studies that seek to assess the involvement of one or more members of a focused panel of candidates in delirium. For a more unbiased, systems-biology view, we searched literature from MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Dimensions between 2016 and 2021 for untargeted proteomic discovery studies for biomarkers of delirium conducted on human geriatric subjects. Two reviewers conducted independent review of all search results, and resolved discordance by concensus. From an overall search of 1172 publications, eight peer-reviewed studies met our defined inclusion criteria. The 370 unique peri-operative biomarkers identified in these reports are enriched in pathways involving the activation of the immune system, inflammatory response, and the coagulation cascade. IL-6 was the most commonly identified biomarker. By reviewing the distribution of protein biomarker candidates from these studies, we conclude that a panel of proteins, rather than a single biomarker, would allow for discriminating delirium cases from non-cases. The paucity of hypothesis-generating studies in the peer-reviewed literature also suggests that a systems-biology view of delirium pathomechanisms has yet to fully emerge.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Some of the funding for this work was supplied by the Burroughs Wellcome training grant to KW, the National Institutes of Health (R01 GM122846) to SAG, and K08 GM134220 and R03
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study used ONLY openly available human data that were originally located at: 1) doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2016.03.2098 2) doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00170 3) doi.org/10.1007/s12265-018-9835-8 4) doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2021.05.002 5) doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2021.699763 6) doi.org/10.1016/j.bbi.2020.06.027 7) doi.org/10.1093/gerona/gly036 8) doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glaa326
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Conflicts of interest: NONE
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
