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.

The 11th edition of Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine welcomes Anthony Fauci to its editorial staff, in addition to more than 85 new contributors. While the organization of the book is similar to previous editions, major emphasis has been placed on disorders that affect multiple organ systems. Important advances in genetics, immunology, and oncology are emphasized. Many chapters of the book have been rewritten and describe major advances in internal medicine. Subjects that received only a paragraph or two of attention in previous editions are now covered in entire chapters. Among the chapters that have been extensively revised are the chapters on infections in the compromised host, on skin rashes in infections, on many of the viral infections, including cytomegalovirus and Epstein-Barr virus, on sexually transmitted diseases, on diabetes mellitus, on disorders of bone and mineral metabolism, and on lymphadenopathy and splenomegaly. The major revisions in these chapters and many

Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine

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

SUMMARY The availability of an increasing number of antiretroviral agents and the rapid evolution of new information has introduced extraordinary complexity into the treatment of HIV-infected persons. In 1996, the Department of Health and Human Services and the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation convened the Panel on Clinical Practices for the Treatment of HIV to develop guidelines for the clinical management of HIV-infected adults and adolescents. This report recommends that care should be supervised by an expert, and makes recommendations for laboratory monitoring including plasma HIV RNA, CD4 cell counts and HIV drug resistance testing. The report also provides guidelines for antiretroviral therapy, including when to start treatment, what drugs to initiate, when to change therapy, and therapeutic options when changing therapy. Special considerations are provided for adolescents and pregnant women. As with treatment of other chronic conditions, therapeutic decisions require a mutual understanding between the patient and the health care provider regarding the benefits and risks of treatment. Antiretroviral regimens are complex, have major side effects, pose difficulty with adherence, and carry serious potential consequences from the development of viral resistance due to non-adherence to the drug regimen or suboptimal levels of antiretroviral agents. Patient education and involvement in therapeutic

/pdf/guidelines-for-the-use-of-antiretroviral-agents-in-hiv-3wuv1pwax4.pdf

Guidelines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-infected adults and adolescents

Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents summarize and evaluate all currently available evidence on a particular issue with the aim to assist physicians in selecting the best management strategies for a typical patient, suffering from a given condition, taking into account the impact on outcome, as well as the risk–benefit ratio of particular diagnostic or therapeutic means. Guidelines are not substitutes for textbooks. The legal implications of medical guidelines have been discussed previously.

A great number of Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents have been issued in recent years by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) as well as by other societies and organizations. Because of the impact on clinical practice, quality criteria for development of guidelines have been established in order to make all decisions transparent to the user. The recommendations for formulating and issuing ESC Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents can be found on the ESC web site (http://www.escardio.org/knowledge/guidelines/rules).

In brief, experts in the field are selected and undertake a comprehensive review of the published evidence for management and/or prevention of a given condition. A critical evaluation of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures is performed, including assessment of the risk–benefit ratio. Estimates of expected health outcomes for larger societies are included, where data exist. The level of evidence and the strength of recommendation of particular treatment options are weighed and graded according to predefined scales, as outlined in the tables below.

The experts of the writing panels have provided disclosure statements of all relationships they may have which might be perceived as real or potential sources of conflicts of interest. These disclosure forms are kept on file at the European Heart House, headquarters of the ESC. Any changes in conflict of interest that arise during the writing period must be notified to the ESC. The Task Force report was entirely …

/pdf/european-guidelines-on-cardiovascular-disease-prevention-in-17acj3uib4.pdf

European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (version 2012) : the fifth joint task force of the European society of cardiology and other societies on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts).

UK obstetric surveillance system uncovered

Objectives Statutory educational attainment measures are rarely used as health study outcomes, but Key Stage 1 (KS1) data formed secondary outcomes in the long-term follow-up to age 7 years of the ORACLE II trial of antibiotic use in preterm babies. This paper describes the approach, compares different approaches to analysis of the KS1 data and compares use of summary KS1 (level) data with use of individual question scores. Participants 3394 children born to women in the ORACLE Children Study and resident in England at age 7. Methods Analysis of educational achievement measured by national end of KS1 data (KS1) using Poisson regression modelling and anchoring of the KS1 data using external standards. Results KS1 summary level data were obtained for 3239 (95%) eligible children; raw individual question scores were obtained for 1899 (54%). Use of individual question scores where available did not change the conclusion of no evidence of treatment effects based on summary KS1 outcome data. Conclusions When accessible for medical research purposes, routinely collected educational outcome data may have advantages of low cost and standardised definition. Here, summary scores lead to similar conclusions to raw (individual question) scores and so are attractive and cost-effective alternatives.

https://adc.bmj.com/content/archdischild/96/1/25.full.pdf

Routine educational outcome measures in health studies: Key Stage 1 in the ORACLE Children Study follow-up of randomised trial cohorts

The effectiveness of interventions targeting infant mortality: a user's guide to the systematic review evidence

Introduction Cesarean sections are the most common major operation worldwide. One in 10 women develops a surgical-site infection after cesarean section. The PREPS pilot trial was developed to assess the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial of vaginal cleansing with chlorhexidine before cesarean section, to reduce infectious morbidity. Material and methods A multi-center, open-label, parallel-group pilot randomized controlled trial across 4 UK maternity units. Women aged ≥16 years, undergoing elective or emergency cesarean section, ≥34 weeks of gestation, and able to give informed consent were eligible. Women were randomized 1:1 to chlorhexidine 0.05% or no cleansing and were followed up until 6 weeks after cesarean section. The feasibility of a larger randomized controlled trial was assessed by the pilot trial's recruitment, ability to use verbal consent in an emergency, adherence, follow-up and withdrawal rates. The main clinical outcome collected was Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) classification of endometritis at 30 days. Trial registration number is ISRCTN33435996. Results A total of 320 women (128% of target) were randomized. Of these, 93% (95% CI 89%-95%) received their allocated intervention. Of the 88 women who had an emergency cesarean section, verbal consent was initially given by 32 (36%) women, with the remainder having sufficient time to give written consent. Endometritis (CDC definition) was collected from medical notes of 96% of women, 68% (95% CI 63%-73%) were followed up at both 14 and 30 days by telephone, and we were able to collect patient-reported outcomes. In the vaginal cleansing arm 2/152 (1.3%) women had endometritis compared with 1/155 (0.7%) in the no cleansing arm (RR 2.08, 95% CI 0.19-22.31). Conclusions It is possible to perform a randomized controlled trial in women undergoing an elective or emergency cesarean section, using a verbal-followed-by-written consent process, while maintaining high adherence and retaining women in the trial.

https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/aogs.13737

Vaginal preparation with chlorhexidine at cesarean section to reduce endometritis and prevent sepsis: A randomized pilot trial (PREPS).

Delay in the diagnosis and initial treatment of postpartum hemorrhage may occur as result of visual underestimation of blood loss. A number of studies have reported that visual estimates of postpartum blood loss are often inaccurate. To address this problem, the use of a collector bag has been proposed to provide an objective and more accurate measurement of blood loss than visual assessment. If effective, when excessive blood loss is observed, a more rapid response by a caregiver would be triggered. Currently, the bag is used routinely in many maternity wards in European countries despite lack of evidence for its efficacy. This cluster randomized controlled trial investigated the effectiveness of a transparent plastic collector bag in reducing the incidence of severe postpartum hemorrhage after vaginal delivery by providing an accurate measurement of postpartum blood loss. The trial was conducted at 78 maternity units in 13 European countries between 2006 and 2007. The participants—25,381 women who had a vaginal delivery—were randomized to systematic use of a collector bag (intervention group, n = 11,037) or to continued visual assessment of postpartum blood loss (control group, n = 14,344). The primary study outcome was the incidence of severe postpartum hemorrhage defined as a composite of all women who experienced one or more of the following: blood transfusion, intravenous plasma expansion, surgical procedure or arterial embolization, treatment with recombinant factor VII, or death. There was no statistical difference between the groups in the incidence of severe postpartum hemorrhage (intervention group: 1.71%, 189/11,037 vs. control group: 2.06%, 295/14, 344) using either individual level analysis or cluster level analysis. In individual level analysis (with data adjusted for maternal age, prophylactic uterotonics used in the third stage, mode of delivery, and birth weight), the adjusted odds ratio was 0.82, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.26 to 2.53, P = 0.7. In cluster level analysis, following adjustment for the baseline rate of severe postpartum hemorrhage, the adjusted weighted mean difference was 0.16%, with a 95% confidence interval of -0.69% to 1.02%, P = 0.7. These findings indicate that the systematic use of a collector bag after vaginal delivery does not reduce the rate of severe postpartum hemorrhage compared to visual estimation.

/pdf/effect-of-a-collector-bag-for-measurement-of-postpartum-4ayl1n7270.pdf

Peter Brocklehurst

Papers

UK obstetric surveillance system uncovered

Routine educational outcome measures in health studies: Key Stage 1 in the ORACLE Children Study follow-up of randomised trial cohorts

The effectiveness of interventions targeting infant mortality: a user's guide to the systematic review evidence

Vaginal preparation with chlorhexidine at cesarean section to reduce endometritis and prevent sepsis: A randomized pilot trial (PREPS).

Effect of a Collector Bag for Measurement of Postpartum Blood Loss After Vaginal Delivery: Cluster Randomised Trial in 13 European Countries