-
Acta Clinica Croatica Jun 2022Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by an unregulated response of a host. Septic shock is its most severe form. It is manifested by a drop in blood... (Review)
Review
Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by an unregulated response of a host. Septic shock is its most severe form. It is manifested by a drop in blood pressure, which decreases tissue perfusion pressure, causing hypoxia that is characteristic of shock. Sepsis is still one of the leading causes of mortality worldwide. Its incidence has increased since the first consensus definitions were established in 1991. Raising sepsis awareness, its significance and the need for better treatment, has led to an improvement in in defining sepsis and the development of guidelines for its treatment. The first guidelines were published in 2004, the second 2008, the third 2013, the fourth 2016, and the last revised guidelines appeared in 2021. This paper will describe the previous and new definitions of sepsis and septic shock, the previous guidelines for the recognition and treatment, and the latest recommendations for treatment. Timely diagnosis is crucial for the outcomes for patients with sepsis and septic shock. The fact is that the sepsis care bundles have been modified to increasingly shorter time determinants, which emphasizes the importance of emergency physicians, who frequently first recognize and begin emergency treatment of septic patients.
Topics: Humans; Shock, Septic; Sepsis; Critical Care; Blood Pressure; Time Factors
PubMed: 36304809
DOI: 10.20471/acc.2022.61.s1.11 -
JAMA Feb 2019Abnormal peripheral perfusion after septic shock resuscitation has been associated with organ dysfunction and mortality. The potential role of the clinical assessment of... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Randomized Controlled Trial
Effect of a Resuscitation Strategy Targeting Peripheral Perfusion Status vs Serum Lactate Levels on 28-Day Mortality Among Patients With Septic Shock: The ANDROMEDA-SHOCK Randomized Clinical Trial.
IMPORTANCE
Abnormal peripheral perfusion after septic shock resuscitation has been associated with organ dysfunction and mortality. The potential role of the clinical assessment of peripheral perfusion as a target during resuscitation in early septic shock has not been established.
OBJECTIVE
To determine if a peripheral perfusion-targeted resuscitation during early septic shock in adults is more effective than a lactate level-targeted resuscitation for reducing mortality.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
Multicenter, randomized trial conducted at 28 intensive care units in 5 countries. Four-hundred twenty-four patients with septic shock were included between March 2017 and March 2018. The last date of follow-up was June 12, 2018.
INTERVENTIONS
Patients were randomized to a step-by-step resuscitation protocol aimed at either normalizing capillary refill time (n = 212) or normalizing or decreasing lactate levels at rates greater than 20% per 2 hours (n = 212), during an 8-hour intervention period.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 28 days. Secondary outcomes were organ dysfunction at 72 hours after randomization, as assessed by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (range, 0 [best] to 24 [worst]); death within 90 days; mechanical ventilation-, renal replacement therapy-, and vasopressor-free days within 28 days; intensive care unit and hospital length of stay.
RESULTS
Among 424 patients randomized (mean age, 63 years; 226 [53%] women), 416 (98%) completed the trial. By day 28, 74 patients (34.9%) in the peripheral perfusion group and 92 patients (43.4%) in the lactate group had died (hazard ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.55 to 1.02]; P = .06; risk difference, -8.5% [95% CI, -18.2% to 1.2%]). Peripheral perfusion-targeted resuscitation was associated with less organ dysfunction at 72 hours (mean SOFA score, 5.6 [SD, 4.3] vs 6.6 [SD, 4.7]; mean difference, -1.00 [95% CI, -1.97 to -0.02]; P = .045). There were no significant differences in the other 6 secondary outcomes. No protocol-related serious adverse reactions were confirmed.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Among patients with septic shock, a resuscitation strategy targeting normalization of capillary refill time, compared with a strategy targeting serum lactate levels, did not reduce all-cause 28-day mortality.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03078712.
Topics: Aged; Capillaries; Cause of Death; Female; Fluid Therapy; Hemodynamics; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Kaplan-Meier Estimate; Lactic Acid; Male; Middle Aged; Organ Dysfunction Scores; Proportional Hazards Models; Renal Replacement Therapy; Respiration, Artificial; Resuscitation; Shock, Septic; Vasoconstrictor Agents
PubMed: 30772908
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.0071 -
The New England Journal of Medicine Aug 2013
Review
Topics: Humans; Incidence; Resuscitation; Risk Factors; Sepsis; Shock, Septic
PubMed: 23984731
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra1208623 -
Polish Archives of Internal Medicine Aug 2022The 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines provided evidence-based recommendations for adult patients with sepsis and septic shock. This iteration of the guidelines... (Review)
Review
The 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines provided evidence-based recommendations for adult patients with sepsis and septic shock. This iteration of the guidelines placed increased emphasis on a diverse, global perspective, as well as on the long-term sequelae of sepsis experienced by patients and their families. The guidelines encompassed the following sections: 1) screening and early treatment; 2) infection; 3) hemodynamic management; 4) ventilation; 5) additional therapies; and 6) goals of care and long-term outcomes. In this review, we provide a summary of key recommendations of interest to the practicing clinician, which are either novel or require a change in practice, as well as those for which the evidence has substantially evolved in the 5 years since the 2016 iteration of the Guidelines. Rather than reviewing the underlying evidence, we emphasize the practical aspects of interpretation, dissemination, and implementation of these recommendations in the clinical setting.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Sepsis; Shock, Septic
PubMed: 35791800
DOI: 10.20452/pamw.16290 -
Biomedical Journal Feb 2022Sepsis remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality among children worldwide. Furthermore, refractory septic shock and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome are the... (Review)
Review
Sepsis remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality among children worldwide. Furthermore, refractory septic shock and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome are the most critical groups which account for a high mortality rate in pediatric sepsis, and their clinical course often deteriorates rapidly. Resuscitation based on hemodynamics can provide objective values for identifying the severity of sepsis and monitoring the treatment response. Hemodynamics in sepsis can be divided into two groups: basic and advanced hemodynamic parameters. Previous therapeutic guidance of early-goal directed therapy (EGDT), which resuscitated based on the basic hemodynamics (central venous pressure and central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2)) has lost its advantage compared with "usual care". Optimization of advanced hemodynamics, such as cardiac output and systemic vascular resistance, has now been endorsed as better therapeutic guidance for sepsis. Despite this, there are still some important hemodynamics associated with prognosis. In this article, we summarize the common techniques for hemodynamic monitoring, list important hemodynamic parameters related to outcomes, and update evidence-based therapeutic recommendations for optimizing resuscitation in pediatric septic shock.
Topics: Child; Hemodynamic Monitoring; Hemodynamics; Humans; Prognosis; Sepsis; Shock, Septic
PubMed: 34653683
DOI: 10.1016/j.bj.2021.10.004 -
JAMA Feb 2016Septic shock currently refers to a state of acute circulatory failure associated with infection. Emerging biological insights and reported variation in epidemiology... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Developing a New Definition and Assessing New Clinical Criteria for Septic Shock: For the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3).
IMPORTANCE
Septic shock currently refers to a state of acute circulatory failure associated with infection. Emerging biological insights and reported variation in epidemiology challenge the validity of this definition.
OBJECTIVE
To develop a new definition and clinical criteria for identifying septic shock in adults.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
The Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine convened a task force (19 participants) to revise current sepsis/septic shock definitions. Three sets of studies were conducted: (1) a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies in adults published between January 1, 1992, and December 25, 2015, to determine clinical criteria currently reported to identify septic shock and inform the Delphi process; (2) a Delphi study among the task force comprising 3 surveys and discussions of results from the systematic review, surveys, and cohort studies to achieve consensus on a new septic shock definition and clinical criteria; and (3) cohort studies to test variables identified by the Delphi process using Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) (2005-2010; n = 28,150), University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) (2010-2012; n = 1,309,025), and Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) (2009-2013; n = 1,847,165) electronic health record (EHR) data sets.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Evidence for and agreement on septic shock definitions and criteria.
RESULTS
The systematic review identified 44 studies reporting septic shock outcomes (total of 166,479 patients) from a total of 92 sepsis epidemiology studies reporting different cutoffs and combinations for blood pressure (BP), fluid resuscitation, vasopressors, serum lactate level, and base deficit to identify septic shock. The septic shock-associated crude mortality was 46.5% (95% CI, 42.7%-50.3%), with significant between-study statistical heterogeneity (I2 = 99.5%; τ2 = 182.5; P < .001). The Delphi process identified hypotension, serum lactate level, and vasopressor therapy as variables to test using cohort studies. Based on these 3 variables alone or in combination, 6 patient groups were generated. Examination of the SSC database demonstrated that the patient group requiring vasopressors to maintain mean BP 65 mm Hg or greater and having a serum lactate level greater than 2 mmol/L (18 mg/dL) after fluid resuscitation had a significantly higher mortality (42.3% [95% CI, 41.2%-43.3%]) in risk-adjusted comparisons with the other 5 groups derived using either serum lactate level greater than 2 mmol/L alone or combinations of hypotension, vasopressors, and serum lactate level 2 mmol/L or lower. These findings were validated in the UPMC and KPNC data sets.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Based on a consensus process using results from a systematic review, surveys, and cohort studies, septic shock is defined as a subset of sepsis in which underlying circulatory, cellular, and metabolic abnormalities are associated with a greater risk of mortality than sepsis alone. Adult patients with septic shock can be identified using the clinical criteria of hypotension requiring vasopressor therapy to maintain mean BP 65 mm Hg or greater and having a serum lactate level greater than 2 mmol/L after adequate fluid resuscitation.
Topics: Adult; Advisory Committees; Biomarkers; Blood Pressure Determination; Cohort Studies; Consensus; Delphi Technique; Fluid Therapy; Humans; Hypotension; Lactates; Observational Studies as Topic; Resuscitation; Review Literature as Topic; Shock, Septic; Vasoconstrictor Agents
PubMed: 26903336
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2016.0289 -
Jornal de Pediatria 2020Review the main aspects of the definition, diagnosis, and management of pediatric patients with sepsis and septic shock. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Review the main aspects of the definition, diagnosis, and management of pediatric patients with sepsis and septic shock.
SOURCE OF DATA
A search was carried out in the MEDLINE and Embase databases. The articles were chosen according to the authors' interest, prioritizing those published in the last five years.
SYNTHESIS OF DATA
Sepsis remains a major cause of mortality in pediatric patients. The variability of clinical presentations makes it difficult to attain a precise definition in pediatrics. Airway stabilization with adequate oxygenation and ventilation if necessary, initial volume resuscitation, antibiotic administration, and cardiovascular support are the basis of sepsis treatment. In resource-poor settings, attention should be paid to the risks of fluid overload when administrating fluids. Administration of vasoactive drugs such as epinephrine or norepinephrine is necessary in the absence of volume response within the first hour. Follow-up of shock treatment should adhere to targets such as restoring vital and clinical signs of shock and controlling the focus of infection. A multimodal evaluation with bedside ultrasound for management after the first hours is recommended. In refractory shock, attention should be given to situations such as cardiac tamponade, hypothyroidism, adrenal insufficiency, abdominal catastrophe, and focus of uncontrolled infection.
CONCLUSIONS
The implementation of protocols and advanced technologies have reduced sepsis mortality. In resource-poor settings, good practices such as early sepsis identification, antibiotic administration, and careful fluid infusion are the cornerstones of sepsis management.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Fluid Therapy; Humans; Pediatrics; Resuscitation; Shock, Septic
PubMed: 31843507
DOI: 10.1016/j.jped.2019.10.007 -
JAMA Aug 2015Septic shock is a clinical emergency that occurs in more than 230,000 US patients each year. OBSERVATIONS AND ADVANCES: In the setting of suspected or documented... (Review)
Review
IMPORTANCE
Septic shock is a clinical emergency that occurs in more than 230,000 US patients each year. OBSERVATIONS AND ADVANCES: In the setting of suspected or documented infection, septic shock is typically defined in a clinical setting by low systolic (≤90 mm Hg) or mean arterial blood pressure (≤65 mm Hg) accompanied by signs of hypoperfusion (eg, oliguria, hyperlactemia, poor peripheral perfusion, or altered mental status). Focused ultrasonography is recommended for the prompt recognition of complicating physiology (eg, hypovolemia or cardiogenic shock), while invasive hemodynamic monitoring is recommended only for select patients. In septic shock, 3 randomized clinical trials demonstrate that protocolized care offers little advantage compared with management without a protocol. Hydroxyethyl starch is no longer recommended, and debate continues about the role of various crystalloid solutions and albumin.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The prompt diagnosis of septic shock begins with obtainment of medical history and performance of a physical examination for signs and symptoms of infection and may require focused ultrasonography to recognize more complex physiologic manifestations of shock. Clinicians should understand the importance of prompt administration of intravenous fluids and vasoactive medications aimed at restoring adequate circulation, and the limitations of protocol-based therapy, as guided by recent evidence.
Topics: Crystalloid Solutions; Fluid Therapy; Humans; Isotonic Solutions; Monitoring, Physiologic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Shock, Cardiogenic; Shock, Septic; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 26284722
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2015.7885 -
Critical Care (London, England) Mar 2017Multiple corticosteroids and treatment regimens have been used as adjuncts in the treatment of septic shock. Qualitative and quantitative differences exist at cellular... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Multiple corticosteroids and treatment regimens have been used as adjuncts in the treatment of septic shock. Qualitative and quantitative differences exist at cellular and tissular levels between the different drugs and their patterns of delivery. The objective of this study was to elucidate any differences between the drugs and their treatment regimens regarding outcomes for corticosteroid use in adult patients with septic shock.
METHODS
Network meta-analysis of the data used for the recently conducted Cochrane review was performed. Studies that included children and were designed to assess respiratory function in pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome, as well as cross-over studies, were excluded. Network plots were created for each outcome, and all analyses were conducted using a frequentist approach assuming a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Complete data from 22 studies and partial data from 1 study were included. Network meta-analysis provided no clear evidence that any intervention or treatment regimen is better than any other across the spectrum of outcomes. There was strong evidence of differential efficacy in only one area: shock reversal. Hydrocortisone boluses and infusions were more likely than methylprednisolone boluses and placebo to result in shock reversal.
CONCLUSIONS
There was no clear evidence that any one corticosteroid drug or treatment regimen is more likely to be effective in reducing mortality or reducing the incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding or superinfection in septic shock. Hydrocortisone delivered as a bolus or as an infusion was more likely than placebo and methylprednisolone to result in shock reversal.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Child; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Shock, Septic
PubMed: 28351429
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-017-1659-4 -
Acta Bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis Jul 2022Septic shock is a main cause of morbidity and mortality in neonates. Septic shock evolves from compensated to uncompensated through 3 distinct phases. Prompt diagnosis... (Review)
Review
Septic shock is a main cause of morbidity and mortality in neonates. Septic shock evolves from compensated to uncompensated through 3 distinct phases. Prompt diagnosis is challenging, since neonatal septic shock may overlap with the physiological changes occurring at birth. The outcome of septic shock depends on a prompt recognition of symptoms and a strict adherence to cardiopulmonary resuscitation guidelines. Fluid administration plays a major role in the initial management of septic shock. If there is no response to volume filling, inotropes must be infused within one hour of onset (dopamine, dobutamine, adrenaline). Life-threatening infections require immediate and aggressive empiric use of antimicrobials. In the pediatric age, delay in antibiotic initiation for treating septic shock is associated with poor outcome and increased risk of mortality. There is a gap regarding first line interventions in neonatal septic shock. This review addresses initial interventions in the treatment of neonatal septic shock and discusses currently available evidences., These interventions may allow to improve the outcome if they are promptly carried out.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Anti-Infective Agents; Child; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Resuscitation; Shock, Septic
PubMed: 35775767
DOI: 10.23750/abm.v93i3.12577