Literature DB >> 15653990

Inclusion criteria for clinical trials in sepsis: did the American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine consensus conference definitions of sepsis have an impact?

Stephen Trzeciak1, Sergio Zanotti-Cavazzoni, Joseph E Parrillo, R Phillip Dellinger.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Over the last 25 years, a growing number of clinical trials have evaluated novel sepsis therapies. To promote uniformity in inclusion criteria for patient enrollment, the American College of Chest Physicians and Society of Critical Care Medicine first published consensus conference definitions for sepsis in 1992. STUDY
OBJECTIVES: To characterize (1) the utilization of specific criteria for patient enrollment in sepsis clinical trials and (2) the impact that the consensus conference definitions have had on these criteria.
DESIGN: We used MEDLINE to identify clinical trials in sepsis from 1976 to 2001. Clinical trials published after the consensus conference (ACC; from 1993 to 2001) were compared with trials published before the consensus conference (BCC; from 1976 to 1992).
RESULTS: We identified 176 clinical trials (ACC, 119 trials; BCC, 57 trials). Clinical trials published ACC were more likely to utilize or reference a previously published standard for inclusion criteria (65% vs 11%, respectively; p < 0.001). The consensus conference definitions were the standards used in 69% of these trials. The utilization of specified values for WBC count, temperature (T), heart rate (HR), and respiratory rate (RR) was significantly increased in the ACC group compared to the BCC group, as follows: WBC count, 62% vs 26%, respectively (p < 0.001); T, 89% vs 56%, respectively (p < 0.001); HR, 77% vs 26%, respectively (p < 0.001); and RR, respectively 76% vs 28% (p < 0.001). ACC, clinical trials were less likely to require blood culture positivity (4 of 119 trials [3%] vs 9 of 57 trials [16%], respectively; p < 0.006) and were more likely to incorporate markers of acute organ dysfunction (81 of 119 trials [68%] vs 28 of 57 trials [49%], respectively; p < 0.03) in the inclusion criteria.
CONCLUSIONS: (1) Since 1992 there has been a significant increase in the utilization of predefined sepsis criteria for patient enrollment in clinical trials, and this increase can be attributed to the existence of consensus conference definitions. (2) Compared to inclusion criteria BCC, inclusion criteria ACC were less reliant on blood culture positivity and were more likely to incorporate markers of organ dysfunction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15653990     DOI: 10.1378/chest.127.1.242

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chest        ISSN: 0012-3692            Impact factor:   9.410


  10 in total

1.  The new sepsis consensus definitions: the good, the bad and the ugly.

Authors:  Charles L Sprung; Roland M H Schein; Robert A Balk
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2016-11-03       Impact factor: 17.440

Review 2.  Changing Definitions of Sepsis.

Authors:  Fethi Gül; Mustafa Kemal Arslantaş; İsmail Cinel; Anand Kumar
Journal:  Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim       Date:  2017-02-01

3.  Procalcitonin and C-reactive protein as markers of systemic inflammatory response syndrome severity in critically ill children.

Authors:  Corsino Rey; Marta Los Arcos; Andrés Concha; Alberto Medina; Soledad Prieto; Pablo Martinez; Belen Prieto
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2007-01-27       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Developing a shared sepsis data infrastructure: a systematic review and concept map to FHIR.

Authors:  Christopher W Seymour; Vincent X Liu; Emily B Brant; Jason N Kennedy; Andrew J King; Lawrence D Gerstley; Pranita Mishra; David Schlessinger; James Shalaby; Gabriel J Escobar; Derek C Angus
Journal:  NPJ Digit Med       Date:  2022-04-04

5.  Immunoglobulins in adult sepsis and septic shock.

Authors:  Susanne Toussaint; Herwig Gerlach
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 3.725

6.  How many general and inflammatory variables need to be fulfilled when defining sepsis due to the 2003 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS definitions in critically ill surgical patients: a retrospective observational study.

Authors:  Manfred Weiss; Markus Huber-Lang; Michael Taenzer; Martina Kron; Birgit Hay; Maximilian Nass; Moritz Huber; Marion Schneider
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2010-12-21       Impact factor: 2.217

Review 7.  Validity of administrative data in recording sepsis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Rachel J Jolley; Keri Jo Sawka; Dean W Yergens; Hude Quan; Nathalie Jetté; Christopher J Doig
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2015-04-06       Impact factor: 9.097

Review 8.  Perspective on optimizing clinical trials in critical care: how to puzzle out recurrent failures.

Authors:  Bruno François; Marc Clavel; Philippe Vignon; Pierre-François Laterre
Journal:  J Intensive Care       Date:  2016-11-04

9.  Different patient case mix by applying the 2003 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS sepsis definitions instead of the 1992 ACCP/SCCM sepsis definitions in surgical patients: a retrospective observational study.

Authors:  Manfred Weiss; Markus Huber-Lang; Michael Taenzer; Karl Traeger; Juergen Altherr; Martina Kron; Birgit Hay; Marion Schneider
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2009-05-18       Impact factor: 2.796

10.  Systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria and the prediction of hospital mortality in critically ill patients: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Leandro Utino Taniguchi; Ellen Maria Campos Pires; José Mauro Vieira; Luciano Cesar Pontes de Azevedo
Journal:  Rev Bras Ter Intensiva       Date:  2017-09-28
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.