Search

Background: Individuals who survive sepsis are at high risk of chronic sequelae, resulting in significant health-economic costs. Several studies have focused on aspects of healthcare pathways of sepsis survivors but comprehensive, longitudinal overview of their pathways of care are scarce. The aim of this retrospective, longitudinal cohort study is to identify sepsis survivor profiles based on their healthcare pathways and describe their healthcare consumption and costs over the 3 years following their index hospitalization., Methods: The data were extracted from the French National Hospital Discharge Database. The study population included all patients above 15 years old, with bacterial sepsis, who survived an incident hospitalization in an acute care facility in 2015. To identify survivor profiles, state sequence and clustering analyses were conducted over the year following the index hospitalization. For each profile, patient characteristics and their index hospital stay and sequelae were described, as well as use of care and its associated monetary costs, both pre- and post-sepsis., Results: New medical (79.2%), psychological (26.9%) and cognitive (18.5%) impairments were identified post-sepsis, and 65.3% of survivors were rehospitalized in acute care. Cumulative mortality reached 36.6% by 3 years post-sepsis. The total medical cost increased by 856 million € in the year post-sepsis. Five patient clusters were identified: home (65.6% of patients), early death (12.9%), late death (6.8%), short-term rehabilitation (11.3%) and long-term rehabilitation (3.3%). Survivors with early and late death clusters had high rates of cancer and primary bacteremia and experienced more hospital-at-home care post-sepsis. Survivors in short- or long-term rehabilitation clusters were older, with higher percentage of septic shock than those coming back home, and had high rates of multiple site infections and higher rates of new psychological and cognitive impairment., Conclusions: Over three years post-sepsis, different profiles of sepsis survivors were identified with different mortality rates, sequels and healthcare services usage and cost. This study confirmed the importance of sepsis burden and suggests that strategies of post-discharge care, in accordance with patient profile, should be further tested in order to reduce sepsis burden., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Sepsis is a complex health condition, leading to long-term morbidity and mortality. Understanding the risk factors for recurrent sepsis, as well as its impact on mid- and long-term mortality among other risk factors, is essential to improve patient survival., Methods: A risk factor analysis, based on French nationwide medico-administrative data, was conducted on a cohort of patients above 15 years old, hospitalized with an incident sepsis in metropolitan France between 1st January 2018 and 31st December 2018 and who survived their index hospitalization. Two main analyses, focusing on outcomes occurring 1-year post-discharge, were conducted: a first one to assess risk factors for recurrent sepsis and a second to assess risk factors for mortality., Results: Of the 178017 patients surviving an incident sepsis episode in 2018 and included in this study, 22.3% died during the 1-year period from discharge and 73.8% had at least one hospital readmission in acute care, among which 18.1% were associated with recurrent sepsis. Patients aged between 56 and 75, patients with cancer and renal disease, with a long index hospital stay or with mediastinal or cardiac infection had the highest odds of recurrent sepsis. One-year mortality was higher for patients with hospital readmission for recurrent sepsis (aOR 2.93; 99% CI 2.78-3.09). Among all comorbidities, patients with cancer (aOR 4.35; 99% CI 4.19-4.52) and dementia (aOR 2.02; 99% CI 1.90-2.15) had the highest odds of 1-year mortality., Conclusion: Hospital readmission for recurrent sepsis is one of the most important risk factors for 1-year mortality of septic patients, along with age and comorbidities. Our study suggests that recurrent sepsis, as well as modifiable or non-modifiable other risk factors identified, should be considered in order to improve patient care pathway and survival., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objective: This study aims to provide a case definition of sepsis of presumed bacterial aetiology based on 10th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) codes, to assess trends in sepsis incidence and mortality between 2015 and 2019 in France, and to describe the characteristics of affected patients and hospital stays., Design: Nationwide, population-based, retrospective observational study., Setting: Metropolitan France between 2015 and 2019., Participants: Between 2015 and 2019, 1 224 433 patients with sepsis of presumed bacterial aetiology were selected from the French National Hospital Discharge Database (Programme de Médicalisation des Systèmes d'Information) and were identified from corresponding ICD-10 codes for explicit sepsis or implicit sepsis., Main Outcomes Measures: Annual overall and age-specific and gender-specific incidence and 95% CI, as well as trends in sepsis incidence and mortality, were estimated. Comorbidities, length of hospital stay and outcomes were described., Results: The sex-standardised and age-standardised incidence per 100 000 (95% CI) increased from 357 (356.0 to 359.0) in 2015 to 403 (401.9 to 405.0) in 2019 and remained higher for males compared with females. Children under 1 year and patients over 75 years consistently had the highest incidence. The most common comorbidities were cancer and chronic heart failure. The median hospital length of stay was 12 days. Most patients came from home, but only half returned home after their hospital stay and approximately 15% were discharged to long-term care. In-hospital mortality was about 25% and declined along the study period., Conclusions: Medico-administrative databases can be used to provide nationwide estimates of the in-hospital burden of bacterial sepsis. The results confirm the high burden of sepsis in France. These data should be complemented by estimating the additional burden associated with fungal and viral infections during the COVID-19 pandemic., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Purpose: Microbiological diagnosis (MD) of infections remains insufficient. The resulting empirical antimicrobial therapy leads to multidrug resistance and inappropriate treatments. We therefore evaluated the cost-effectiveness of direct molecular detection of pathogens in blood for patients with severe sepsis (SES), febrile neutropenia (FN) and suspected infective endocarditis (SIE)., Methods: Patients were enrolled in a multicentre, open-label, cluster-randomised crossover trial conducted during two consecutive periods, randomly assigned as control period (CP; standard diagnostic workup) or intervention period (IP; additional testing with LightCycler ® SeptiFast). Multilevel models used to account for clustering were stratified by clinical setting (SES, FN, SIE)., Results: A total of 1416 patients (907 SES, 440 FN, 69 SIE) were evaluated for the primary endpoint (rate of blood MD). For SES patients, the MD rate was higher during IP than during CP [42.6% (198/465) vs. 28.1% (125/442), odds ratio (OR) 1.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.43-2.50; P < 0.001], with an absolute increase of 14.5% (95% CI 8.4-20.7). A trend towards an association was observed for SIE [35.4% (17/48) vs. 9.5% (2/21); OR 6.22 (0.98-39.6)], but not for FN [32.1% (70/218) vs. 30.2% (67/222), P = 0.66]. Overall, turn-around time was shorter during IP than during CP (22.9 vs. 49.5 h, P < 0.001) and hospital costs were similar (median, mean ± SD: IP €14,826, €18,118 ± 17,775; CP €17,828, €18,653 ± 15,966). Bootstrap analysis of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio showed weak dominance of intervention in SES patients., Conclusion: Addition of molecular detection to standard care improves MD and thus efficiency of healthcare resource usage in patients with SES. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00709358.

Sepsis involves a wide array of sources and microorganisms, only a fraction of which are microbiologically documented. Culture-negative sepsis poses special diagnostic challenges to both clinicians and microbiologists and further questions the validity of sepsis definitions.

Objective: To assess the presence of microbial DNA in the blood by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and its association with disease severity and markers of inflammation in severe sepsis and to compare the performance of PCR with blood culture (BC)., Design: Prospective multicentric controlled observational study., Setting: Three surgical intensive care units in university centers and large teaching hospitals., Patients: One hundred forty-two patients with severe sepsis and 63 surgical controls., Interventions: Presence of microbial DNA was assessed by multiplex PCR upon enrollment, and each time a BC was obtained., Measurements and Main Results: Controls had both approximately 4% positive PCRs and BCs. In severe sepsis, 34.7% of PCRs were positive compared to 16.5% of BCs (P < 0.001). Consistently, 70.3% of BCs had a corresponding PCR result, while only 21.4% of PCR results were confirmed by BC. Compared to patients with negative PCRs at enrollment, those testing positive had higher organ dysfunction scores [SOFA, median (25th-75th percentile) 12 (7-15) vs. 9 (7-11); P = 0.023] and a trend toward higher mortality (PCR negative 25.3%; PCR positive 39.1%; P = 0.115)., Conclusions: In septic patients, concordance between BC and PCR is moderate. However, PCR-based pathogen detection correlated with disease severity even if the BC remained negative, suggesting that presence of microbial DNA in the bloodstream is a significant event. The clinical utility to facilitate treatment decisions warrants investigation.

Objective: To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," published in 2004., Design: Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding., Methods: We used the Grades of Recommendation, 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. A strong recommendation (1) indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost) or clearly do not. Weak recommendations (2) indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations., Results: Key recommendations, listed by category, include early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for postoperative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B), targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization (2C); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); and a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B)., Conclusions: There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Internationally recognized definitions of septic syndromes are available and make it possible to conduct more homogenous clinical trials. Nearly 15% of patients in intensive care have severe sepsis, and two thirds of them septic shock. In France, it is estimated that approximately 75,000 patients with severe sepsis are admitted to intensive care units, and the frequency of sepsis is increasing. Hospital mortality is 20% for simple sepsis and 40% and higher for cases of severe sepsis or septic shock; it has nonetheless been improving over the past decade. Prognosis depends on the severity of organ dysfunctions, in particular, of cardiovascular failure. Early identification of sepsis and of patients at risk of developing septic shock, together with rapid intervention aiming especially to correct hemodynamic disorders, is likely to improve prognosis., ((c) 2006, Masson, Paris.)

Although well documented in children with sickle cell disease (SCD), the incidence, cause, and outcome of bloodstream infection (BSI) are poorly defined in adults with SCD. Through a 5-year retrospective analysis of a cohort of 900 patients followed at our institution, we identified 56 episodes of BSI in 47 patients. The incidence rate of BSI was 1.2 episodes per 100 patient-years. As compared to the patients followed in the cohort, those with BSI were more likely to be younger (p = 0.001), to have Hb-S disease (p = 0.008), severe disease (p = 0.001), or additional immunosuppression (p = 0.05). BSI was hospital-acquired in 46% of cases and mainly associated with venous catheters (41%) and Staphylococcus aureus (34%). Pneumococci were rarely identified (10.7%). Despite an adequate duration of antibiotic therapy, the course of BSI was marked by a high frequency of associated bone-joint infection. Bone-joint infection was noted in 18 patients (32% of episodes) and occurred either during the initial BSI episode (13 patients) or 1-6 months after BSI resolution (5 patients). Factors associated with the occurrence of bone-joint infection were previous osteonecrosis (relative risk, 2.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-5.3) and S. aureus infection (relative risk, 3.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-8.4). In conclusion, BSI is a rare event in adults with SCD compared to children. It mainly occurs in those with a severe underlying disease and a venous catheter. These patients have a high risk of associated bone-joint infection and therefore must be closely monitored.

Objective: To define central venous catheter-related infections in infants and children for the purpose of enrolling children in sepsis studies, for epidemiology and surveillance studies, and for clinical management., Methods: Review of the literature and consensus of experts., Results: No changes were made to the current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria for defining local catheter infection. Because catheter tips are not available as often in children as in adults, smaller blood volumes are drawn per culture decreasing sensitivity, and antibiotics are rarely withheld, slight modifications to the existing adult Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria were made to increase practical use. Catheter-related bloodstream infection was categorized as definite, probable, and possible based on culture results and clinical symptoms., Conclusions: For the purposes of enrolling patients with sepsis in clinical trials, only patients who meet criteria for definite catheter-related bloodstream infection should be categorized as having the catheter as the infection source. Because many patients suspected of having catheter-related bloodstream infection do not have positive blood culture results, which makes the confirmation of infection difficult, we recommend that these patients not be enrolled in sepsis trials. Because catheter tips are often not obtained for culture in children, the epidemiology of catheter-associated bloodstream infection (bloodstream infection in a patient who has a central venous catheter and no other obvious source of infection) is better understood than the epidemiology of confirmed catheter-related bloodstream infection in infants and children. Definitions for catheter-related bloodstream infection that compare the through-catheter and peripheral culture for time to positivity or for quantitative growth are unlikely to be falsely positive, but sensitivity requires further validation.

Rationale: The systemic inflammatory response syndrome has low specificity to identify infected patients at risk of worsening to severe sepsis or shock., Objective: To examine the incidence of and risk factors for worsening sepsis in infected patients., Methods: A 1-year inception cohort study in 28 intensive care units of patients (n = 1,531) having a first episode of infection on admission or during the stay., Measurements and Main Results: The cumulative incidence of progression to severe sepsis or shock was 20% and 24% at Days 10 and 30, respectively. Variables independently associated (hazard ratio [HR]) with worsening sepsis included: temperature higher than 38.2 degrees C (1.6), heart rate greater than 120/minute (1.3), systolic blood pressure higher than 110 mm Hg (1.5), platelets higher than 150 x 109/L (1.5), serum sodium higher than 145 mmol/L (1.5), bilirubin higher than 30 mumol/L (1.3), mechanical ventilation (1.5), and five variables characterizing infection (pneumonia [HR 1.5], peritonitis [1.5], primary bacteremia [1.8], and infection with gram-positive cocci [1.3] or aerobic gram-negative bacilli [1.4]). The 12 weighted variables were included in a score (Risk of Infection to Severe Sepsis and Shock Score, range 0-49), summarized in four classes of "low" (score 0-8) and "moderate" (8.5-16) risk (9% and 17% probability of worsening, respectively), and of "high" (16.5-24) and "very high" (score > 24) risk (31% and 55% probability, respectively)., Conclusions: One of four patients presenting with infection/sepsis worsen to severe sepsis or shock. A score estimating this risk, using objectively defined criteria for systemic inflammatory response syndrome, could be used by physicians to stratify patients for clinical management and to test new interventions.

Objective: In 2003, critical care and infectious disease experts representing 11 international organizations developed management guidelines for the diagnosis of infection in sepsis that would be of practical use for the bedside clinician, under the auspices of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign, an international effort to increase awareness and improve outcome in severe sepsis., Design: The process included a modified Delphi method, a consensus conference, several subsequent smaller meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee., Methods: The modified Delphi methodology used for grading recommendations built on a 2001 publication sponsored by the International Sepsis Forum. We undertook a systematic review of the literature graded along five levels to create recommendation grades from A to E, with A being the highest grade. Pediatric considerations to contrast adult and pediatric management are in the article by Parker et al. on p. S591., Conclusions: Obtaining a precise bacteriological diagnosis before starting antibiotic therapy is, when possible, of paramount importance for the success of therapeutic strategy during sepsis. Two to three blood cultures should be performed, preferably from a peripheral vein, without interval between samples to avoid delaying therapy. A quantitative approach is preferred in most cases when possible, in particular for catheter-related infections and ventilator-associated pneumonia. Diagnosing community-acquired pneumonia is complex, and a diagnostic algorithm is proposed. Appropriate samples are indicated during soft tissue and intraabdominal infections, but cultures obtained through the drains are discouraged.

Objective: Ten years ago 8.4% of patients in French intensive care units (ICUs) were found to have severe sepsis or shock and 56% died in the hospital. As novel therapies for severe sepsis are emerging, updated epidemiological information is required., Design and Setting: An inception cohort study conducted in 206 ICUs of randomly selected hospitals over a 2-week period in 2001, including all patients meeting criteria for clinically or microbiologically documented severe sepsis (with > or =1 organ dysfunction)., Measurements and Results: Among 3738 admissions, 546 (14.6%) patients experienced severe sepsis or shock, of which 30% were ICU-acquired. The median age of patients was 65 years, and 54.1% had at least one chronic organ system dysfunction. The median (range) Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) at onset of severe sepsis were 48 (2-129) and 9 (1-24), respectively. Mortality was 35% at 30 days; at 2 months the mortality rate was 41.9%, and 11.4% of patients remained hospitalized. The median (range) hospital stay was 25 (0-112) days in survivors and 7 (0-90) days in non-survivors. Chronic liver and heart failure, acute renal failure and shock, SAPS II at onset of severe sepsis and 24-h total SOFA scores were the independent risk factors most strongly associated with death., Conclusions: Although the attack rate of severe sepsis in French ICUs appears to have increased over the past decade, its associated mortality has decreased, suggesting improved management of patients. Severe sepsis incurs considerable resources use, and implementation of effective management strategies and continued research efforts are needed.

Since 1992, epidemiological and clinical studies have classified severe infections into three categories: sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock. Microbiological documentation is not always provided. We used a different approach, focusing on the infection itself, whether or not it is microbiologically documented or associated with sepsis. In an international prospective cohort study, all patients admitted to the participating units from May 1997 to May 1998 were followed until hospital discharge. Twenty-eight intensive care units (ICU) in eight countries enrolled 14,364 patients. Of these, 6011 stayed in the ICU for less than 24 hours and 8353 for more than 24 hours. Overall, 3034 infectious episodes were recorded at ICU admission (crude incidence rate 21.1%). Among patients hospitalized for more than 24 hours, 1581 infectious episodes occurred in the ICU (crude incidence rate 18.9%), including 713 cases (45%) in patients who were already infected at ICU admission. These rates varied among the ICUs. Respiratory, gastrointestinal, urinary tract and primary bloodstream infections represented about 80% of all infections. Hospital-acquired and Intensive Care Unit-acquired infections were more frequently microbiologically documented than community-acquired infections (71% and 86%, respectively, vs 55%). About 28% of all infections were associated with sepsis, 24% with severe sepsis and 30% with septic shock (18% were not classified). Crude in-hospital mortality rates ranged from 16.9% in uninfected patients to 53.6% in patients who were both infected at the time of ICU admission and subsequently acquired an infection during the ICU stay. The in-hospital mortality rate increased with severity, from 20% for sepsis to 40% for severe sepsis and 60% for septic shock, but also depended on the origin of infection (community vs hospital/ICU). Crude incidence rates of ICU infection were high, varying among ICUs and patient subsets. Thus, vital outcome depends not only on the severity of sepsis but also on the characteristics of the infection.

Objective: To document the costs and outcomes of the various forms of the septic syndromes [systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), sepsis, severe sepsis, septic shock), particularly those associated with infection acquired in an intensive care unit (ICU)., Design: Prospective data collection for all septic patients admitted to a medical ICU during a 1-year period. Costs were computed from the viewpoint of the hospital., Results: Mean total hospital costs were Euro 26,256, Euro 35,185, and Euro 27,083 for patients with sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock, respectively. Total costs varied slightly according to the site of infection and the severity of sepsis but were influenced mostly by its mode of acquisition: patients having sepsis associated with ICU-acquired infection incurred total costs about three times those of patients presenting with infection and sepsis on ICU admission (from Euro 39,908 in patients with ICU acquired sepsis to Euro 44,851 in patients with ICU-acquired septic shock). Stratifying patients by the presence of ICU-acquired infection also showed that a first episode of infection complicated by ICU-acquired sepsis incurred at least 2.5 times more costs than a single episode of sepsis., Conclusions: In this series the medical costs of sepsis were not markedly influenced by its severity but by its mode of acquisition. Due to wide variations in ICU costs cost-effectiveness analyses of treatments for sepsis should document the case-mix of patients and the contribution to this of nosocomial infections.

The clinical significance of the systemic inflammatory response in infected patients remains unclear. We examined risk factors for hospital mortality in 3,608 intensive care unit patients included in the European Sepsis Study. Patients were categorized as having infection without or with (i.e., sepsis) systemic inflammatory response, severe sepsis, and septic shock, on the first day of infection. Hospital mortality varied from 25 to 60% according to sepsis stage, but did not differ between the first two categories (hazard ratio, 0.94; p = 0.55), whereas there was a grading of severity from sepsis to severe sepsis (1.53, p < 10-4) and septic shock (2.64, p < 10-4). Within each stage, mortality was unaffected by the number of inflammatory response criteria. Prognostic factors identified by Cox regression included comorbid conditions, severity of acute illness and acute organ dysfunction, shock, nosocomial infection, and infection caused by aerobic gram-negative bacilli, enterobacteria, Staphylococcus aureus, and infection from a digestive or unknown source. We conclude that whereas the categorization of infection by the presence of organ dysfunction or shock has strong prognostic significance, infection and sepsis have similar outcomes, unaffected by the presence or number of inflammatory response criteria. Refinement of risk stratification of patients presenting with infection and no organ dysfunction is needed.

Objectives: To examine the incidence of infections and to describe them and their outcome in intensive care unit (ICU) patients., Design and Setting: International prospective cohort study in which all patients admitted to the 28 participating units in eight countries between May 1997 and May 1998 were followed until hospital discharge., Patients: A total of 14,364 patients were admitted to the ICUs, 6011 of whom stayed less than 24 h and 8353 more than 24 h., Results: Overall 3034 infectious episodes were recorded at ICU admission (crude incidence: 21.1%). In ICU patients hospitalised longer than 24 h there were 1581 infectious episodes (crude incidence: 18.9%) including 713 (45%) in patients already infected at ICU admission. These rates varied between ICUs. Respiratory, digestive, urinary tracts, and primary bloodstream infections represented about 80% of all sites. Hospital-acquired and ICU-acquired infections were documented more frequently microbiologically than community-acquired infections (71% and 86%, respectively vs. 55%). About 28% of infections were associated with sepsis, 24% with severe sepsis and 30% with septic shock, and 18% were not classified. Crude hospital mortality rates ranged from 16.9% in non-infected patients to 53.6% in patients with hospital-acquired infections at the time of ICU admission and acquiring infection during the ICU stay., Conclusions: The crude incidence of ICU infections remains high, although the rate varies between ICUs and patient subsets, illustrating the added burden of nosocomial infections in the use of ICU resources.

Acute gangrenous dermo-hypodermitis and necrotizing fasciitis are potentially life-threatening infections of skin and soft tissues, which may be difficult to recognize at an early stage. A combination of local signs (erythema, mottling, bullous formation) and of symptoms suggestive of sepsis should prompt early suspicion and therapeutic intervention. Group A streptococci remain the major pathogen involved in necrotizing fasciitis involving extremities, following minor trauma or surgery, and sometimes apparently spontaneously. The most severe form is streptococcal toxic shock syndrome, where production of exotoxins (superantigens) is a major factor contributing to the severity of the syndrome. A number of other pathogens, often combined in mixed aerobic-anaerobic infections may be involved, especially in post-surgical and perineal gangrene. Surgery remains the mainstay of therapy, and should be considered as soon as the clinical suspicion arises. Antibiotic therapy is based on penicillins (penicillin G for streptococcal gangrene, or beta-lactamases penicillins in polymicrobial infections). New therapeutic approaches (clindamycin and immunoglobulins) may be useful in streptococcal toxic shock. The prognosis appears to have improved in recent years with early therapeutic intervention, but remains largely dependent on the severity of the septic response and underlying diseases.

To examine the relationships between bacteremia and severe sepsis and assess the influence of characteristics of infection on the risk of severe sepsis and outcome of bacteremia, we analyzed all clinically significant episodes of bacteremia occurring during a 2-mo prospective survey of 85,750 admissions to adult wards and intensive care units (ICUs) of 24 hospitals in France. Incidence rates of bacteremia and of bacteremic severe sepsis were 9.8 (95% CI: 9.2 to 10.5) and 2.6 (95% CI: 2.2 to 2.9), respectively, per 1,000 adult admissions; these rates were eight and 32 times higher in ICUs than in wards, respectively. Independent risk factors for severe sepsis during bacteremia included age (p < 0.001) and an intraabdominal (p < 0.001), pulmonary (p < 0.001), neuromeningeal (p = 0.004), or multiple (p < 0.001) source of bacteremia, but not categories of organisms involved. The probability of death at 28 d after bacteremia was 25% (95% CI: 23% to 29%), and was 54% (95% CI: 48% to 61%) in patients with bacteremic severe sepsis. The risk of death after bacteremia increased with age (p < 0.001), a rapidly or ultimately fatal underlying disease (p < 0.001), and the presence of severe sepsis (p < 0.001), shock (p = 0.03), and infection caused by gram-positive organisms other than coagulase-negative staphylococci, relative to other organisms (p < 0.001). A primary urinary tract source of infection was associated with a better prognosis (p = 0.03). We conclude that whereas sources of infection influence both the risk of severe sepsis and the outcome of bacteremia, the microbiologic characteristics of infection influence only the outcome, with gram-negative organisms and coagulase-negative staphylococci posing a lesser risk than other organisms.

Objective: To examine the incidence, risk factors, and outcome of severe sepsis in intensive care unit (ICU) patients., Design and Setting: Inception cohort study from a 2-month prospective survey of 11,828 consecutive admissions to 170 adult ICUs of public hospitals in France., Patients: Patients meeting clinical criteria for severe sepsis were included and classified as having documented infection (ie, documented severe sepsis, n = 742), or a clinical diagnosis of infection without microbiological documentation (ie, culture-negative severe sepsis, n = 310)., Main Outcome Measures: Hospital and 28-day mortality after severe sepsis., Results: Clinically suspected sepsis and confirmed severe sepsis occurred in 9.0 (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.5 to 9.5) and 6.3 (95% CI, 5.8 to 6.7) of 100 ICU admissions, respectively. The 28-day mortality was 56% (95% CI, 52% to 60%) in patients with severe sepsis, and 60% (95% CI, 55% to 66%) in those with culture-negative severe sepsis. Major determinants of both early (< 3 days) and secondary deaths in the whole cohort were the Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II and the number of acute organ system failures. Other risk factors for early death included a low arterial blood pH (< 7.33) (P < .001) and shock (P = .03), whereas secondary deaths were associated with the admission category (P < .001), a rapidly or ultimately fatal underlying disease (P < .001), a preexisting liver (P = .01) or cardiovascular (P = .002) insufficiency, hypothermia (P = .02), thrombocytopenia (P = .01), and multiple sources of infection (P = .02). In patients with documented sepsis, bacteremia was associated with early mortality (P = .03)., Conclusions: Only three of four patients presenting with clinically suspected severe sepsis have documented infection. However, patients with clinically suspected sepsis but without microbiological documentation and patients with documented infection share common risk factors and are at similarly high risk of death. In addition to the severity of illness score, acute organ failures and the characteristics of underlying diseases should be accounted for in stratification of patients and outcome analyses.

We report the case of a patient with pemphigus who presented Nocardia asteroides septicemia. The infection was controlled with an original association of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and amikacin.

In this paper, we report 21 cases of Campylobacter fetus bloodstream infection observed in our institution over a 9-year period. The median age of the patients was 78 years. Most of them (62%) had a significant underlying disease, such as diabetes, immunodeficiency or cardiovascular disease. The main clinical features were fever with (62% of cases) or without (38%) extra-intestinal symptoms. These included mycotic aneurysm of the abdominal aorta (24%) and cellulitis (19%). Antibiotic treatment was mainly based on amoxicilline-clavulanate (57%) or imipenem (21%), for a median duration of 28 days. A favourable outcome was observed in 72% of cases. Death directly attributable to infection was observed for three patients, due to the rupture of an infected aneurysm or relapsing bloodstream infection with septic shock. All patients initially treated with imipenem had a favourable outcome. This report adds evidence that C. fetus bloodstream infection should be suspected in elderly patients with fever, immunodeficiency and cardiovascular damages. Imipenem seems to be the most active drug, especially in severe cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Résumé Objectif Les dermohypodermites bactériennes nécrosantes et fasciites nécrosantes (DHBN-FN) sont des infections sévères de la peau et des parties molles associées à une mortalité élevée. Afin de préciser les modalités de prise en charge des DHBN-FN dans les réanimations francophones, nous avons conduit une enquête de pratique sous l’égide de la Société française d’anesthésie et de réanimation. Type d’étude Questionnaire auto-administré rempli en ligne. Méthodes Quatre mille six cent vingt médecins anesthésistes et/ou réanimateurs étaient invités par courrier électronique à remplir un questionnaire en ligne. Résultats Cent soixante-quinze médecins exerçant dans 135 réanimations différentes ont répondu au questionnaire (3,8 %). Parmi les répondants, 42 % déclaraient n’avoir pris en charge que deux patients au maximum atteints de DHBN-FN au cours de l’année précédente, 59 % déclaraient ne pas avoir de référent chirurgical et 72 % n’avaient pas de référent médical. Le délai à l’accès au bloc opératoire était de plus de six heures dans 31 % des cas et non prioritaire dans 13 % des cas. Dix-sept pour cent des répondants déclaraient que l’accès au bloc opératoire ne retardait jamais la prise en charge des patients. Les causes de retard à la prise en charge chirurgicale des patients étaient : retard diagnostique (45 %), retard à la validation de l’indication opératoire (37 %), difficultés d’accès au bloc opératoire (8 %). Enfin, 83 % des répondants estimaient que la création de parcours de soins dédiés pourrait améliorer la prise en charge des patients. Conclusion Cette enquête illustre l’hétérogénéité de prise en charge des DHBN-FN dans un nombre élevé de réanimations francophones et met en évidence l’absence fréquente de structure de prise en charge adaptée, contribuant probablement à retarder la prise en charge opératoire. Un parcours de soin dédié pourrait permettre d’améliorer la prise en charge des DHBN-FN. Objectives Necrotizing fasciitis (NF) are rare and severe soft tissue infections associated with a high mortality rate. In order to assess the management of NF in French-speaking intensive care units (ICUs), we conducted a survey endorsed by the French Society of Anesthesia and Intensive Care (SFAR). Study design Online self-administered survey. Methods A link to an online survey was sent by email to 4620 anesthesiologists and/or intensivists and was available online from January to February 2014. Results One hundred and seventy-five physicians (3.8%) who worked in 135 ICUs filled out the online survey. Among respondents, 42% reported having managed up to two patients with NF during the previous year; 59% and 72% of respondents reported not having a surgical and a medical specialist consultant, respectively. A delayed access to the operating room (OR) of more than 6 hours was reported in 31% of cases and access to the OR was reported not to be routinely considered as a priority in 13% of cases. Only 17% of respondents reported that time to transfer to the OR was never a cause for delayed surgery. The main causes for delayed surgery were: delayed diagnosis (45%), delayed validation of surgical intervention (37%), and difficulty of access to the OR (8%). Finally, 83% of respondents estimated that creating dedicated multidisciplinary teams for managing NFs could lead to improving outcomes. Conclusion This survey illustrates the heterogeneous management of NF in French-speaking ICUs and points out several logistical aspects that should be improved to reduce the time to the first surgical debridement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This report describes a retrospective analysis of 33 patients admitted to an intensive care unit with suspicion of necrotising fasciitis (NF) of the extremities. The aim of the study was to clarify the clinical presentation of NF in order to determine when early surgery should be considered. Twenty-one patients with surgically confirmed NF were compared to 12 patients with superficial soft tissue infection. At admission, patients with NF were more likely to have skin areas of ischaemia or necrosis, fluid-filled vesicles, and severe sepsis or septic shock. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]