Objective: In 1991, the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) and the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) convened a "Consensus Conference", the goals of which were to provide a conceptual and a practical framework to define the systemic inflammatory response to infection, which is a progressive inju- rious process that falls under the gen- eralized term 'sepsis' and includes sepsis-associated organ dysfunction as well. The general definitions intro- duced as a result of that conference have been widely used in practice, and have served as the foundation for in- clusion criteria for numerous clinical trials of therapeutic interventions. Nevertheless, there has been an impe- tus from experts in the field to modify these definitions to reflect our current understanding of the pathophysiology of these syndromes. Design: Several North American and European inten- sive care societies agreed to revisit the definitions for sepsis and related con- ditions. This conference was spon- sored by the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), The European So-

2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference

In 1991, the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) and the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) convened a "Consensus Conference," the goals of which were to "provide a conceptual and a practical framework to define the systemic inflammatory response to infection, which is a progressive injurious process that falls under the generalized term 'sepsis' and includes sepsis-associated organ dysfunction as well. The general definitions introduced as a result of that conference have been widely used in practice, and have served as the foundation for inclusion criteria for numerous clinical trials of therapeutic interventions. Nevertheless, there has been an impetus from experts in the field to modify these definitions to reflect our current understanding of the pathophysiology of these syndromes. Several North American and European intensive care societies agreed to revisit the definitions for sepsis and related conditions. This conference was sponsored by the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), The European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM), The American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP), the American Thoracic Society (ATS), and the Surgical Infection Society (SIS). 29 participants attended the conference from Europe and North America. In advance of the conference, subgroups were formed to evaluate the following areas: signs and symptoms of sepsis, cell markers, cytokines, microbiologic data, and coagulation parameters.. The present manuscript serves as the final report of the 2001 International Sepsis Definitions Conference. 1. Current concepts of sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock remain useful to clinicians and researchers. 2. These definitions do not allow precise staging or prognostication of the host response to infection. 3. While SIRS remains a useful concept, the diagnostic criteria for SIRS published in 1992 are overly sensitive and non-specific. 4. An expanded list of signs and symptoms of sepsis may better reflect the clinical response to infection. 6. PIRO, a hypothetical model for staging sepsis is presented, which, in the future, may better characterize the syndrome on the basis of predisposing factors and premorbid conditions, the nature of the underlying infection, the characteristics of the host response, and the extent of the resultant organ dysfunction.

Importance Estimates from claims-based analyses suggest that the incidence of sepsis is increasing and mortality rates from sepsis are decreasing. However, estimates from claims data may lack clinical fidelity and can be affected by changing diagnosis and coding practices over time. Objective To estimate the US national incidence of sepsis and trends using detailed clinical data from the electronic health record (EHR) systems of diverse hospitals. Design, Setting, and Population Retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to 409 academic, community, and federal hospitals from 2009-2014. Exposures Sepsis was identified using clinical indicators of presumed infection and concurrent acute organ dysfunction, adapting Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3) criteria for objective and consistent EHR-based surveillance. Main Outcomes and Measures Sepsis incidence, outcomes, and trends from 2009-2014 were calculated using regression models and compared with claims-based estimates using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes for severe sepsis or septic shock. Case-finding criteria were validated against Sepsis-3 criteria using medical record reviews. Results A total of 173 690 sepsis cases (mean age, 66.5 [SD, 15.5] y; 77 660 [42.4%] women) were identified using clinical criteria among 2 901 019 adults admitted to study hospitals in 2014 (6.0% incidence). Of these, 26 061 (15.0%) died in the hospital and 10 731 (6.2%) were discharged to hospice. From 2009-2014, sepsis incidence using clinical criteria was stable (+0.6% relative change/y [95% CI, −2.3% to 3.5%], P  = .67) whereas incidence per claims increased (+10.3%/y [95% CI, 7.2% to 13.3%], P P  = .004), but there was no significant change in the combined outcome of death or discharge to hospice (−1.3%/y [95% CI, −3.2% to 0.6%], P  = .19). In contrast, mortality using claims declined significantly (−7.0%/y [95% CI, −8.8% to −5.2%], P P P P  = .23). Conclusions and Relevance In clinical data from 409 hospitals, sepsis was present in 6% of adult hospitalizations, and in contrast to claims-based analyses, neither the incidence of sepsis nor the combined outcome of death or discharge to hospice changed significantly between 2009-2014. The findings also suggest that EHR-based clinical data provide more objective estimates than claims-based data for sepsis surveillance.

Incidence and Trends of Sepsis in US Hospitals Using Clinical vs Claims Data, 2009-2014

Sepsis is a common and lethal syndrome: although outcomes have improved, mortality remains high. No specific anti-sepsis treatments exist; as such, management of patients relies mainly on early recognition allowing correct therapeutic measures to be started rapidly, including administration of appropriate antibiotics, source control measures when necessary, and resuscitation with intravenous fluids and vasoactive drugs when needed. Although substantial developments have been made in the understanding of the basic pathogenesis of sepsis and the complex interplay of host, pathogen, and environment that affect the incidence and course of the disease, sepsis has stubbornly resisted all efforts to successfully develop and then deploy new and improved treatments. Existing models of clinical research seem increasingly unlikely to produce new therapies that will result in a step change in clinical outcomes. In this Commission, we set out our understanding of the clinical epidemiology and management of sepsis and then ask how the present approaches might be challenged to develop a new roadmap for future research.

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/laninf/PIIS1473-3099(15)70112-X.pdf

Sepsis: a roadmap for future research

Objective:To develop definitions of bloodstream infections in the newborn that would enable clinicians to identify infection early, so patients can be enrolled in clinical trials. The definitions should be useful for surveillance and epidemiologic purposes.Method:Search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochr

Definitions of bloodstream infection in the newborn.

Background To be able to diagnose and treat sepsis better it is important not only to improve the knowledge about definitions and pathophysiology, but also to gain more insight into specialists' perception of, and attitude towards, the current diagnosis and treatment of sepsis. Methods The study was conducted as a prospective, international survey by structured telephone interview. The subjects were intensive care physicians and other specialist physicians caring for intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Results The 1058 physicians who were interviewed (including 529 intensivists) agreed that sepsis is a leading cause of death on the ICU and that the incidence of sepsis is increasing, but that the symptoms of sepsis can easily be misattributed to other conditions. Physicians were concerned that this could lead to under-reporting of sepsis. Two-thirds (67%) were concerned that a common definition is lacking and 83% said it is likely that sepsis is frequently missed. Not more than 17% agreed on any one definition. Conclusion There is a general awareness about the inadequacy of the current definitions of sepsis. Physicians caring for patients with sepsis recognise the difficulty of defining and diagnosing sepsis and are aware that they miss the diagnosis frequently.

/pdf/an-international-sepsis-survey-a-study-of-doctors-knowledge-3ivy2y0r1q.pdf

Mitchel Levy

Papers

An international sepsis survey: a study of doctors' knowledge and perception about sepsis.