Importance Definitions of sepsis and septic shock were last revised in 2001. Considerable advances have since been made into the pathobiology (changes in organ function, morphology, cell biology, biochemistry, immunology, and circulation), management, and epidemiology of sepsis, suggesting the need for reexamination. Objective To evaluate and, as needed, update definitions for sepsis and septic shock. Process A task force (n = 19) with expertise in sepsis pathobiology, clinical trials, and epidemiology was convened by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Definitions and clinical criteria were generated through meetings, Delphi processes, analysis of electronic health record databases, and voting, followed by circulation to international professional societies, requesting peer review and endorsement (by 31 societies listed in the Acknowledgment). Key Findings From Evidence Synthesis Limitations of previous definitions included an excessive focus on inflammation, the misleading model that sepsis follows a continuum through severe sepsis to shock, and inadequate specificity and sensitivity of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria. Multiple definitions and terminologies are currently in use for sepsis, septic shock, and organ dysfunction, leading to discrepancies in reported incidence and observed mortality. The task force concluded the term severe sepsis was redundant. Recommendations Sepsis should be defined as life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection. For clinical operationalization, organ dysfunction can be represented by an increase in the Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score of 2 points or more, which is associated with an in-hospital mortality greater than 10%. Septic shock should be defined as a subset of sepsis in which particularly profound circulatory, cellular, and metabolic abnormalities are associated with a greater risk of mortality than with sepsis alone. Patients with septic shock can be clinically identified by a vasopressor requirement to maintain a mean arterial pressure of 65 mm Hg or greater and serum lactate level greater than 2 mmol/L (>18 mg/dL) in the absence of hypovolemia. This combination is associated with hospital mortality rates greater than 40%. In out-of-hospital, emergency department, or general hospital ward settings, adult patients with suspected infection can be rapidly identified as being more likely to have poor outcomes typical of sepsis if they have at least 2 of the following clinical criteria that together constitute a new bedside clinical score termed quickSOFA (qSOFA): respiratory rate of 22/min or greater, altered mentation, or systolic blood pressure of 100 mm Hg or less. Conclusions and Relevance These updated definitions and clinical criteria should replace previous definitions, offer greater consistency for epidemiologic studies and clinical trials, and facilitate earlier recognition and more timely management of patients with sepsis or at risk of developing sepsis.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/articlepdf/2492881/jsc160002.pdf

The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3)

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

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a complex disorder for which currently there is no accepted definition. Having a uniform standard for diagnosing and classifying AKI would enhance our ability to manage these patients. Future clinical and translational research in AKI will require collaborative networks of investigators drawn from various disciplines, dissemination of information via multidisciplinary joint conferences and publications, and improved translation of knowledge from pre-clinical research. We describe an initiative to develop uniform standards for defining and classifying AKI and to establish a forum for multidisciplinary interaction to improve care for patients with or at risk for AKI. Members representing key societies in critical care and nephrology along with additional experts in adult and pediatric AKI participated in a two day conference in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, in September 2005 and were assigned to one of three workgroups. Each group's discussions formed the basis for draft recommendations that were later refined and improved during discussion with the larger group. Dissenting opinions were also noted. The final draft recommendations were circulated to all participants and subsequently agreed upon as the consensus recommendations for this report. Participating societies endorsed the recommendations and agreed to help disseminate the results. The term AKI is proposed to represent the entire spectrum of acute renal failure. Diagnostic criteria for AKI are proposed based on acute alterations in serum creatinine or urine output. A staging system for AKI which reflects quantitative changes in serum creatinine and urine output has been developed. We describe the formation of a multidisciplinary collaborative network focused on AKI. We have proposed uniform standards for diagnosing and classifying AKI which will need to be validated in future studies. The Acute Kidney Injury Network offers a mechanism for proceeding with efforts to improve patient outcomes.

Acute Kidney Injury Network: report of an initiative to improve outcomes in acute kidney injury

The acute respiratory distress syndrome is a common, devastating clinical syndrome of acute lung injury that affects both medical and surgical patients. Since the last review of this syndrome appeared in the Journal, 1 more uniform definitions have been devised and important advances have occurred in the understanding of the epidemiology, natural history, and pathogenesis of the disease, leading to the design and testing of new treatment strategies. This article provides an overview of the definitions, clinical features, and epidemiology of the acute respiratory distress syndrome and discusses advances in the areas of pathogenesis, resolution, and treatment. Historical Perspective and Definitions . . .

/pdf/the-acute-respiratory-distress-syndrome-4dksnctehq.pdf

The acute respiratory distress syndrome

Background Sepsis represents a substantial health care burden, and there is limited epidemiologic information about the demography of sepsis or about the temporal changes in its incidence and outcome. We investigated the epidemiology of sepsis in the United States, with specific examination of race and sex, causative organisms, the disposition of patients, and the incidence and outcome. Methods We analyzed the occurrence of sepsis from 1979 through 2000 using a nationally representative sample of all nonfederal acute care hospitals in the United States. Data on new cases were obtained from hospital discharge records coded according to the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification. Results Review of discharge data on approximately 750 million hospitalizations in the United States over the 22-year period identified 10,319,418 cases of sepsis. Sepsis was more common among men than among women (mean annual relative risk, 1.28 [95 percent confidence interval, 1.24 to 1.32]...

/pdf/the-epidemiology-of-sepsis-in-the-united-states-from-1979-2d7h61l2eh.pdf

The Epidemiology of Sepsis in the United States from 1979 through 2000

Objective:Sepsis is an increasingly common and lethal medical condition that occurs in people of all ages. The influence of age on sepsis risk and outcome is incompletely understood. We sought to determine the independent effect of age on the incidence, severity, and outcome of adult sepsis.Design:L

The effect of age on the development and outcome of adult sepsis.

Objective:The purpose of this study was to describe the natural history, identify risk factors, and determine outcomes for the development of postoperative delirium in the elderly.Background:Postoperative delirium is a common and deleterious complication in geriatric patients.Methods:Subjects older

Postoperative delirium in the elderly: risk factors and outcomes.

Objectives: (1) Determine the relationship of geriatric assessment markers to 6-month postoperative mortality in elderly patients. (2) Create a clinical prediction rule using geriatric markers from preoperative assessment. Background: Geriatric surgery patients have unique physiologic vulnerability requiring preoperative assessment beyond the traditional evaluation of older adults. The constellation of frailty, disability and comorbidity predict poor outcomes in elderly hospitalized patients. Methods: Prospectively, subjects ≥65 years undergoing a major operation requiring postoperative intensive care unit admission were enrolled. Preoperative geriatric assessments included: Mini-Cog Test (cognition), albumin, having fallen in the past 6-months, hematocrit, Katz Score (function), and Charlson Index (comorbidities). Outcome measures included 6-month mortality (primary) and postdischarge institutionalization (secondary). Results: One hundred ten subjects (age 74 ± 6 years) were studied. Six-month mortality was 15% (16/110). Preoperative markers related to 6-month mortality included: impaired cognition (P < 0.01), recent falls (P < 0.01), lower albumin (P < 0.01), greater anemia (P < 0.01), functional dependence (P < 0.01), and increased comorbidities (P < 0.01). Similar statistical relationships were found for all 6 markers and postdischarge institutionalization. Logistic regression identified any functional dependence (odds ratio 13.9) as the strongest predictor of 6-month mortality. Four or more markers in any one patient predicted 6-month mortality with a sensitivity of 81% (13/16) and specificity of 86% (81/94). Conclusions: Geriatric assessment markers for frailty, disability and comorbidity predict 6-month postoperative mortality and postdischarge institutionalization. The preoperative presence of ≥4 geriatric-specific markers has high sensitivity and specificity for 6-month mortality. Preoperative assessment using geriatric-specific markers is a substantial paradigm shift from the traditional preoperative evaluation of older adults.

Redefining geriatric preoperative assessment using frailty, disability and co-morbidity.

Objective. —To determine the effect of a history of chronic alcohol abuse on the incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and in-hospital mortality. Design. —Prospective cohort study. Patients. —A total of 351 medical and surgical intensive care unit patients with one of seven at-risk diagnoses for the development of ARDS. Main Outcome Measures. —The development of ARDS and in-hospital mortality. Results. —Of the 351 patients enrolled in the study, the incidence of ARDS in patients with a history of alcohol abuse was significantly higher than in patients without a history of alcohol abuse (43% vs 22%) ( P P P P =.003) than the mortality rate in patients without a history of alcohol abuse (36%). Conclusions. —A prior history of chronic alcohol abuse significantly increases the risk of developing ARDS in critically ill patients with an identified at-risk diagnosis. Our results may be useful in the earlier and more accurate identification of patients at high risk for developing ARDS. ( JAMA . 1996;275:50-54)

Marc Moss

Papers

The Epidemiology of Sepsis in the United States from 1979 through 2000

The effect of age on the development and outcome of adult sepsis.

Postoperative delirium in the elderly: risk factors and outcomes.

Redefining geriatric preoperative assessment using frailty, disability and co-morbidity.

The Role of Chronic Alcohol Abuse in the Development of Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Adults