Objective:To provide an update to the “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock,” last published in 2008.Design:A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at ke

Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012.

To provide an update to the “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock,” last published in 2008. A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Recommendations were classified into three groups: (1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; (2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and (3) pediatric considerations. Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 h after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 h of the recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 h of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1B); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement is based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥65 mmHg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of (a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or (b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7–9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a Pao
 2/Fio
 2 ratio of ≤100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 h) for patients with early ARDS and a Pao
 2/Fi
 o
 2 180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 h after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 h of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5–10 min (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven “absolute”’ adrenal insufficiency (2C). Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

/pdf/surviving-sepsis-campaign-international-guidelines-for-229kg8suph.pdf

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock, 2012

Objective
To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, “Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock,” published in 2004.

/pdf/surviving-sepsis-campaign-international-guidelines-for-lbjfg8yybt.pdf

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.

To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, “Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock,” published in 2004. Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding. We used the GRADE system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation [1] indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost), or clearly do not. Weak recommendations [2] indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations. Key recommendations, listed by category, include: early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures prior to antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7–10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure ≥ 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for post-operative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7–9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B) targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization ( 2C ); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper GI bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for the management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008

Objective —To examine the association between the use of right heart catheterization (RHC) during the first 24 hours of care in the intensive care unit (ICU) and subsequent survival, length of stay, intensity of care, and cost of care Design —Prospective cohort study Setting —Five US teaching hospitals between 1989 and 1994 Subjects —A total of 5735 critically ill adult patients receiving care in an ICU for 1 of 9 prespecified disease categories Main Outcome Measures —Survival time, cost of care, intensity of care, and length of stay in the ICU and hospital, determined from the clinical record and from the National Death Index A propensity score for RHC was constructed using multivariable logistic regression Case-matching and multivariable regression modeling techniques were used to estimate the association of RHC with specific outcomes after adjusting for treatment selection using the propensity score Sensitivity analysis was used to estimate the potential effect of an unidentified or missing covariate on the results Results —By case-matching analysis, patients with RHC had an increased 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 124; 95% confidence interval, 103-149) The mean cost (25th, 50th, 75th percentiles) per hospital stay was $49300 ($17000, $30500, $56600) with RHC and $35700 ($11 300, $20600, $39200) without RHC Mean length of stay in the ICU was 148 (5,9, 17) days with RHC and 130 (4,7, 14) days without RHC These findings were all confirmed by multivariable modeling techniques Subgroup analysis did not reveal any patient group or site for which RHC was associated with improved outcomes Patients with higher baseline probability of surviving 2 months had the highest relative risk of death following RHC Sensitivity analysis suggested that a missing covariate would have to increase the risk of death 6-fold and the risk of RHC 6-fold for a true beneficial effect of RHC to be misrepresented as harmful Conclusion —In this observational study of critically ill patients, after adjustment for treatment selection bias, RHC was associated with increased mortality and increased utilization of resources The cause of this apparent lack of benefit is unclear The results of this analysis should be confirmed in other observational studies These findings justify reconsideration of a randomized controlled trial of RHC and may guide patient selection for such a study

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/407990/jama_276_11_030.pdf

The effectiveness of right heart catheterization in the initial care of critically ill patients

FLOW-directed right-heart catheterization is used extensively to monitor the hemodynamic status of critically ill patients. After acute myocardial infarction, measurements of the cardiac index and ...

Evaluation of right-heart catheterization in the critically ill patient without acute myocardial infarction

Pulmonary effects of experimental graded aspiration of hydrochloric acid.

We studied the effect of changes in inspiratory flow rate () on gas exchange and respiratory system mechanics during mechanical ventilation. Seven patients with respiratory failure caused by severe chronic airway obstruction (CAO group) and 6 patients with other causes of respiratory failure (ORF group) were studied at 3 settings, 40 L/min, 70 L/min, and 100 L/min. In the CAO group, as increased from 40 L/min to 100 L/min, arterial oxygen tension increased 18%, venous admixture decreased 23.2%, dead space to tidal volume ratio decreased 23.7%, and tidal compliance of the respiratory system increased 31.2%. In the ORF group, as increased, there was little change in most parameters measured. The changes in the CAO group may be explained by redistribution of ventilation to low ventilation-perfusion ratio units, which empty more completely during the longer expiratory times allowed at high . Using a simple two-compartment lung model we determined that an increase in expiratory time from 4.2 to 6.1 s (the incr...

Effect of inspiratory flow rate on gas exchange during mechanical ventilation.

The extravascular thermal volume of the lung (ETV) has been measured in dogs as the difference between mean transit time (t) volumes for heat and indocyanine green dye across the pulmonary circulation, calculated as the product of thermal dilution cardiac output (CO) and the difference in t for aortic indicator-dilution curves generated by right and left atrial injections. ETV measurements were compared with the extravascular lung mass (ELM): in 21 normal dogs, ETV/ELM = 1.11 +/- 0.14 (SD); in 17 dogs with hydrostatic pulmonary edema (up to 21 g/kg), ETV/ELM = 0.90 +/- 0.11; and in 27 dogs with alloxan pulmonary edema (up to 51 g/kg); ETV/ELM = 0.93 +/- 0.13. For all 65 dogs the mean ETVELM was 0.98 +/- 0.15, and the liner regression was ETV (ml/kg) = 0.90 ELM (g/kg) + 0.86 +/- 2.25 (SEE; r = 0.96). Calculations based on measurements of lung specific heat predict that ETV/ELM should equal 0.984. With acute changes in pulmonary hemodynamics, ETV was reduced by reductions in pulmonary arterial pressure (Ppa) sufficient to produce zone 1 conditions at the top of the lung. However, ETV was not affected by increases in CO (mean = 50%) produced by nitroprusside or by increases in Ppa and pulmonary blood volume (mean = 27%) produced by partial mitral valve obstruction. Distortion of the thermal dilution curve due to position of the arterial thermistor appears to be the greatest source of variability and overestimation. Simultaneous measurements from pairs of thermistors differed by 14% (range 0.4–50%).

D. R. McCaffree

Papers

Evaluation of right-heart catheterization in the critically ill patient without acute myocardial infarction

Pulmonary effects of experimental graded aspiration of hydrochloric acid.

Effect of inspiratory flow rate on gas exchange during mechanical ventilation.

Effect of edema and hemodynamic changes on extravascular thermal volume of the lung

Cardiac arrhythmias during postural drainage and chest percussion of critically ill patients