Literature DB >> 28542029

The Impact of the Sepsis-3 Septic Shock Definition on Previously Defined Septic Shock Patients.

Sarah A Sterling1, Michael A Puskarich, Andrew F Glass, Faheem Guirgis, Alan E Jones.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The Third International Consensus Definitions Task Force (Sepsis-3) recently recommended changes to the definitions of sepsis. The impact of these changes remains unclear. Our objective was to determine the outcomes of patients meeting Sepsis-3 septic shock criteria versus patients meeting the "old" (1991) criteria of septic shock only.
DESIGN: Secondary analysis of two clinical trials of early septic shock resuscitation.
SETTING: Large academic emergency departments in the United States. PATIENTS: Patients with suspected infection, more than or equal to two systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, and systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg after fluid resuscitation.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients were further categorized as Sepsis-3 septic shock if they demonstrated hypotension, received vasopressors, and exhibited a lactate greater than 2 mmol/L. We compared in-hospital mortality in patients who met the old definition only with those who met the Sepsis-3 criteria.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Four hundred seventy patients were included in the present analysis. Two hundred (42.5%) met Sepsis-3 criteria, whereas 270 (57.4%) met only the old definition. Patients meeting Sepsis-3 criteria demonstrated higher severity of illness by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (9 vs 5; p < 0.001) and mortality (29% vs 14%; p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis of 127 patients meeting only the old definition demonstrated significant mortality benefit following implementation of a quantitative resuscitation protocol (35% vs 10%; p = 0.006).
CONCLUSION: In this analysis, 57% of patients meeting old definition for septic shock did not meet Sepsis-3 criteria. Although Sepsis-3 criteria identified a group of patients with increased organ failure and higher mortality, those patients who met the old criteria and not Sepsis-3 criteria still demonstrated significant organ failure and 14% mortality rate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28542029      PMCID: PMC5693309          DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002512

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Med        ISSN: 0090-3493            Impact factor:   7.598


  23 in total

1.  Massive pulmonary embolism.

Authors:  Nils Kucher; Elisa Rossi; Marisa De Rosa; Samuel Z Goldhaber
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2006-01-23       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 2.  Update in sepsis 2012.

Authors:  James A Russell; Keith R Walley
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2013-06-15       Impact factor: 21.405

Review 3.  Two decades of mortality trends among patients with severe sepsis: a comparative meta-analysis*.

Authors:  Elizabeth K Stevenson; Amanda R Rubenstein; Gregory T Radin; Renda Soylemez Wiener; Allan J Walkey
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 7.598

Review 4.  2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference.

Authors:  Mitchell M Levy; Mitchell P Fink; John C Marshall; Edward Abraham; Derek Angus; Deborah Cook; Jonathan Cohen; Steven M Opal; Jean-Louis Vincent; Graham Ramsay
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 7.598

5.  30-Day risk-standardized mortality and readmission rates after ischemic stroke in critical access hospitals.

Authors:  Judith H Lichtman; Erica C Leifheit-Limson; Sara B Jones; Yun Wang; Larry B Goldstein
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2012-08-30       Impact factor: 7.914

6.  Systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria in defining severe sepsis.

Authors:  Kirsi-Maija Kaukonen; Michael Bailey; David Pilcher; D Jamie Cooper; Rinaldo Bellomo
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2015-03-17       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Use of the SOFA score to assess the incidence of organ dysfunction/failure in intensive care units: results of a multicenter, prospective study. Working group on "sepsis-related problems" of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine.

Authors:  J L Vincent; A de Mendonça; F Cantraine; R Moreno; J Takala; P M Suter; C L Sprung; F Colardyn; S Blecher
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 7.598

8.  Multicenter observational study of the development of progressive organ dysfunction and therapeutic interventions in normotensive sepsis patients in the emergency department.

Authors:  Ryan C Arnold; Robert Sherwin; Nathan I Shapiro; Jennifer L O'Connor; Lindsey Glaspey; Sam Singh; Patrick Medado; Stephen Trzeciak; Alan E Jones
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 3.451

9.  Characteristics and outcomes of patients with vasoplegic versus tissue dysoxic septic shock.

Authors:  Sarah A Sterling; Michael A Puskarich; Nathan I Shapiro; Stephen Trzeciak; Jeffrey A Kline; Richard L Summers; Alan E Jones
Journal:  Shock       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 3.454

10.  The impact of compliance with 6-hour and 24-hour sepsis bundles on hospital mortality in patients with severe sepsis: a prospective observational study.

Authors:  Fang Gao; Teresa Melody; Darren F Daniels; Simon Giles; Samantha Fox
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2005-11-11       Impact factor: 9.097

View more
  22 in total

1.  [Intensive care studies from 2017/2018].

Authors:  C J Reuß; M Bernhard; C Beynon; A Hecker; C Jungk; C Nusshag; M A Weigand; D Michalski; T Brenner
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 1.041

2.  Clinical implications of the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3).

Authors:  Shannon M Fernando; Bram Rochwerg; Andrew J E Seely
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2018-09-10       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) POSITION STATEMENT: Why IDSA Did Not Endorse the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines.

Authors: 
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 9.079

Review 4.  Rationalizing antimicrobial therapy in the ICU: a narrative review.

Authors:  Jean-François Timsit; Matteo Bassetti; Olaf Cremer; George Daikos; Jan de Waele; Andre Kallil; Eric Kipnis; Marin Kollef; Kevin Laupland; Jose-Artur Paiva; Jesús Rodríguez-Baño; Étienne Ruppé; Jorge Salluh; Fabio Silvio Taccone; Emmanuel Weiss; François Barbier
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 17.440

5.  Bacteraemia in emergency departments: effective antibiotic reassessment is associated with a better outcome.

Authors:  Charlotte Aillet; Didier Jammes; Agnès Fribourg; Sophie Léotard; Olivier Pellat; Patricia Etienne; Dominique Néri; Djamel Lameche; Olivier Pantaloni; Serge Tournoud; Pierre-Marie Roger
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2017-11-21       Impact factor: 3.267

6.  Incidence and outcomes of sepsis after cardiac surgery as defined by the Sepsis-3 guidelines.

Authors:  S H Howitt; M Herring; I Malagon; C N McCollum; S W Grant
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  2017-11-24       Impact factor: 9.166

7.  The authors reply.

Authors:  Sarah A Sterling; Michael A Puskarich; Alan E Jones
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 7.598

Review 8.  Integrating molecular pathogenesis and clinical translation in sepsis-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome.

Authors:  Joshua A Englert; Christopher Bobba; Rebecca M Baron
Journal:  JCI Insight       Date:  2019-01-24

9.  Clinical outcome comparison of patients with septic shock defined by the new sepsis-3 criteria and by previous criteria.

Authors:  Seung Mok Ryoo; Gu Hyun Kang; Tae Gun Shin; Sung Yeon Hwang; Kyuseok Kim; You Hwan Jo; Yoo Seok Park; Sung-Hyuk Choi; Young Hoon Yoon; Woon Yong Kwon; Gil Joon Suh; Tae Ho Lim; Kap Su Han; Han Sung Choi; Sung Phil Chung; Won Young Kim
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 2.895

10.  Protective effect of taurine on sepsis‑induced lung injury via inhibiting the p38/MAPK signaling pathway.

Authors:  Jiao Chen; Xiang Xue; Jianqin Cai; Ling Jia; Baodi Sun; Wei Zhao
Journal:  Mol Med Rep       Date:  2021-07-19       Impact factor: 2.952

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.