Search

There is a widespread use of biomarkers in modern intensive care. The potential benefit for the patients is, however, not fully investigated. This paper will discuss biomarkers regarding the diagnosis of infections and their potential use in antibiotic stewardship programs (ABS) in order to guide antimicrobial therapy. In the field of infections, procalcitonin (PCT) seems to be the most widespread marker. PCT is able to differentiate between inflammation and infection. Also, in the context of ABS rounds, PCT is well established.

Importance: Adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy is suggested by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign in refractory septic shock only. The efficacy of hydrocortisone in patients with severe sepsis without shock remains controversial., Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone therapy in patients with severe sepsis prevents the development of septic shock., Design, Setting, and Participants: Double-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted from January 13, 2009, to August 27, 2013, with a follow-up of 180 days until February 23, 2014. The trial was performed in 34 intermediate or intensive care units of university and community hospitals in Germany, and it included 380 adult patients with severe sepsis who were not in septic shock., Interventions: Patients were randomly allocated 1:1 either to receive a continuous infusion of 200 mg of hydrocortisone for 5 days followed by dose tapering until day 11 (n = 190) or to receive placebo (n = 190)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was development of septic shock within 14 days. Secondary outcomes were time until septic shock, mortality in the intensive care unit or hospital, survival up to 180 days, and assessment of secondary infections, weaning failure, muscle weakness, and hyperglycemia (blood glucose level >150 mg/dL [to convert to millimoles per liter, multiply by 0.0555])., Results: The intention-to-treat population consisted of 353 patients (64.9% male; mean [SD] age, 65.0 [14.4] years). Septic shock occurred in 36 of 170 patients (21.2%) in the hydrocortisone group and 39 of 170 patients (22.9%) in the placebo group (difference, -1.8%; 95% CI, -10.7% to 7.2%; P = .70). No significant differences were observed between the hydrocortisone and placebo groups for time until septic shock; mortality in the intensive care unit or in the hospital; or mortality at 28 days (15 of 171 patients [8.8%] vs 14 of 170 patients [8.2%], respectively; difference, 0.5%; 95% CI, -5.6% to 6.7%; P = .86), 90 days (34 of 171 patients [19.9%] vs 28 of 168 patients [16.7%]; difference, 3.2%; 95% CI, -5.1% to 11.4%; P = .44), and 180 days (45 of 168 patients [26.8%] vs 37 of 167 patients [22.2%], respectively; difference, 4.6%; 95% CI, -4.6% to 13.7%; P = .32). In the hydrocortisone vs placebo groups, 21.5% vs 16.9% had secondary infections, 8.6% vs 8.5% had weaning failure, 30.7% vs 23.8% had muscle weakness, and 90.9% vs 81.5% had hyperglycemia., Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with severe sepsis not in septic shock, use of hydrocortisone compared with placebo did not reduce the risk of septic shock within 14 days. These findings do not support the use of hydrocortisone in these patients., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00670254.

Sepsis is still the leading cause of mortality in noncardiac intensive care units. The new definition of sepsis emphasizes the importance of organ dysfunction. The Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score is an indicator for organ dysfunction. The diagnosis of sepsis is for the most part made on clinical parameters with an altered mental status being a very sensitive indicator. Microbiological work-up is essential and two sets of blood cultures are the recommended minimum. Management includes prompt initiation of adequate antibiotic treatment and swift fluid resuscitation. Overinfusion is to be avoided as this itself can have a negative impact on patient outcome.

Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is an important organ failure, which has an enormous negative impact on outcome in patients with severe sepsis., Methods: In this paper, the pathophysiological causes as well as noninterventional and interventional (extracorporeal) treatment of patients with AKI and severe sepsis are described., Results: The cornerstone of noninterventional therapy is infection control and heamodynamic stabilization with fluid resuscitation and vasopressors. In patients with deteriorating AKI, extracorporeal treatment should be started early. Generally, continuous and intermittent modes are considered to be equally effective and possible. In practice, a continuous form is preferred in hemodynamically unstable patients., Discussion: The idea that AKI may easily be overcome by starting extracorporeal treatment is no longer true. AKI is much more complex. The dynamic process of the disease should be kept in mind when choosing the correct mode and dose of the extracorporeal treatment. Antibiotic dosage must be adjusted when kidney function is improving or deteriorating.

Context: Early appropriate antimicrobial therapy leads to lower mortality rates associated with severe sepsis. The role of empirical combination therapy comprising at least 2 antibiotics of different mechanisms remains controversial., Objective: To compare the effect of moxifloxacin and meropenem with the effect of meropenem alone on sepsis-related organ dysfunction., Design, Setting, and Patients: A randomized, open-label, parallel-group trial of 600 patients who fulfilled criteria for severe sepsis or septic shock (n = 298 for monotherapy and n = 302 for combination therapy). The trial was performed at 44 intensive care units in Germany from October 16, 2007, to March 23, 2010. The number of evaluable patients was 273 in the monotherapy group and 278 in the combination therapy group., Interventions: Intravenous meropenem (1 g every 8 hours) and moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 hours) or meropenem alone. The intervention was recommended for 7 days and up to a maximum of 14 days after randomization or until discharge from the intensive care unit or death, whichever occurred first., Main Outcome Measure: Degree of organ failure (mean of daily total Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA] scores over 14 days; score range: 0-24 points with higher scores indicating worse organ failure); secondary outcome: 28-day and 90-day all-cause mortality. Survivors were followed up for 90 days., Results: Among 551 evaluable patients, there was no statistically significant difference in mean SOFA score between the meropenem and moxifloxacin group (8.3 points; 95% CI, 7.8-8.8 points) and the meropenem alone group (7.9 points; 95% CI, 7.5-8.4 points) (P = .36). The rates for 28-day and 90-day mortality also were not statistically significantly different. By day 28, there were 66 deaths (23.9%; 95% CI, 19.0%-29.4%) in the combination therapy group compared with 59 deaths (21.9%; 95% CI, 17.1%-27.4%) in the monotherapy group (P = .58). By day 90, there were 96 deaths (35.3%; 95% CI, 29.6%-41.3%) in the combination therapy group compared with 84 deaths (32.1%; 95% CI, 26.5%-38.1%) in the monotherapy group (P = .43)., Conclusion: Among adult patients with severe sepsis, treatment with combined meropenem and moxifloxacin compared with meropenem alone did not result in less organ failure., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00534287.

Practice guidelines are systematically developed statements and recommendations that assist the physicians and patients in making decisions about appropriate health care measures for specific clinical circumstances taking into account specific national health care structures. The 1(st) revision of the S-2k guideline of the German Sepsis Society in collaboration with 17 German medical scientific societies and one self-help group provides state-of-the-art information (results of controlled clinical trials and expert knowledge) on the effective and appropriate medical care (prevention, diagnosis, therapy and follow-up care) of critically ill patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. The guideline had been developed according to the "German Instrument for Methodological Guideline Appraisal" of the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies (AWMF). In view of the inevitable advancements in scientific knowledge and technical expertise, revisions, updates and amendments must be periodically initiated. The guideline recommendations may not be applied under all circumstances. It rests with the clinician to decide whether a certain recommendation should be adopted or not, taking into consideration the unique set of clinical facts presented in connection with each individual patient as well as the available resources.

Early optimization of fluid status is of central importance in the treatment of critically ill patients. This study aims to investigate whether inferior vena cava (IVC) diameters correlate with invasively assessed hemodynamic parameters and whether this approach may thus contribute to an early, non-invasive evaluation of fluid status. Thirty mechanically ventilated patients with severe sepsis or septic shock (age 60 +/- 15 years; APACHE-II score 31 +/- 8; 18 male) were included. IVC diameters were measured throughout the respiratory cycle using transabdominal ultrasonography. Consecutively, volume-based hemodynamic parameters were determined using the single-pass thermal transpulmonary dilution technique. This was a prospective study in a tertiary care academic center with a 24-bed medical intensive care unit (ICU) and a 14-bed anesthesiological ICU. We found a statistically significant correlation of both inspiratory and expiratory IVC diameter with central venous pressure (p = 0.004 and p = 0.001, respectively), extravascular lung water index (p = 0.001, p < 0.001, respectively), intrathoracic blood volume index (p = 0.026, p = 0.05, respectively), the intrathoracic thermal volume (both p < 0.001), and the PaO(2)/FiO(2) oxygenation index (p = 0.007 and p = 0.008, respectively). In this study, IVC diameters were found to correlate with central venous pressure, extravascular lung water index, intrathoracic blood volume index, the intrathoracic thermal volume, and the PaO(2)/FiO(2) oxygenation index. Therefore, sonographic determination of IVC diameter seems useful in the early assessment of fluid status in mechanically ventilated septic patients. At this point in time, however, IVC sonography should be used only in addition to other measures for the assessment of volume status in mechanically ventilated septic patients., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Context: The benefit of corticosteroids in severe sepsis and septic shock remains controversial., Objective: We examined the benefits and risks of corticosteroid treatment in severe sepsis and septic shock and the influence of dose and duration., Data Sources: We searched the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and LILACS (through March 2009) databases as well as reference lists of articles and proceedings of major meetings, and we contacted trial authors., Study Selection: Randomized and quasi-randomized trials of corticosteroids vs placebo or supportive treatment in adult patients with severe sepsis/septic shock per the American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine consensus definition were included., Data Extraction: All reviewers agreed on trial eligibility. One reviewer extracted data, which were checked by the other reviewers and by the trials' authors whenever possible. Some unpublished data were obtained from the trials' authors. The primary outcome for this review was 28-day mortality., Results: We identified 17 randomized trials (n = 2138) and 3 quasi-randomized trials (n = 246) that had acceptable methodological quality to pool in a meta-analysis. Twenty-eight-day mortality for treated vs control patients was 388/1099 (35.3%) vs 400/1039 (38.5%) in randomized trials (risk ratio [RR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-1.00; P = .05; I(2) = 53% by random-effects model) and 28/121 (23.1%) vs 24/125 (19.2%) in quasi-randomized trials (RR, 1.05, 95% CI, 0.69-1.58; P = .83). In 12 trials investigating prolonged low-dose corticosteroid treatment, 28-day mortality for treated vs control patients was 236/629 (37.5%) vs 264/599 (44%) (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.97; P = .02). This treatment increased 28-day shock reversal (6 trials; 322/481 [66.9%] vs 276/471 [58.6%]; RR, 1.12; 95% CI, 1.02-1.23; P = .02; I(2) = 4%) and reduced intensive care unit length of stay by 4.49 days (8 trials; 95% CI, -7.04 to -1.94; P < .001; I(2) = 0%) without increasing the risk of gastroduodenal bleeding (13 trials; 65/800 [8.1%] vs 56/764 [7.3%]; P = .50; I(2) = 0%), superinfection (14 trials; 184/998 [18.4%] vs 170/950 [17.9%]; P = .92; I(2) = 8%), or neuromuscular weakness (3 trials; 4/407 [1%] vs 7/404 [1.7%]; P = .58; I(2) = 30%). Corticosteroids increased the risk of hyperglycemia (9 trials; 363/703 [51.6%] vs 308/670 [46%]; P < .001; I(2) = 0%) and hypernatremia (3 trials; 127/404 [31.4%] vs 77/401 [19.2%]; P < .001; I(2) = 0%)., Conclusions: Corticosteroid therapy has been used in varied doses for sepsis and related syndromes for more than 50 years, with no clear benefit on mortality. Since 1998, studies have consistently used prolonged low-dose corticosteroid therapy, and analysis of this subgroup suggests a beneficial drug effect on short-term mortality.

Objective: To simultaneously determine perceived vs. practiced adherence to recommended interventions for the treatment of severe sepsis or septic shock., Design: One-day cross-sectional survey., Setting: Representative sample of German intensive care units stratified by hospital size., Patients: Adult patients with severe sepsis or septic shock., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: Practice recommendations were selected by German Sepsis Competence Network (SepNet) investigators. External intensivists visited intensive care units randomly chosen and asked the responsible intensive care unit director how often these recommendations were used. Responses "always" and "frequently" were combined to depict perceived adherence. Thereafter patient files were audited. Three hundred sixty-six patients on 214 intensive care units fulfilled the criteria and received full support. One hundred fifty-two patients had acute lung injury or acute respiratory distress syndrome. Low-tidal volume ventilation < or = 6 mL/kg/predicted body weight was documented in 2.6% of these patients. A total of 17.1% patients had tidal volume between 6 and 8 mL/kg predicted body weight and 80.3% > 8 mL/kg predicted body weight. Mean tidal volume was 10.0 +/- 2.4 mL/kg predicted body weight. Perceived adherence to low-tidal volume ventilation was 79.9%. Euglycemia (4.4-6.1 mmol/L) was documented in 6.2% of 355 patients. A total of 33.8% of patients had blood glucose levels < or = 8.3 mmol/L and 66.2% were hyperglycemic (blood glucose > 8.3 mmol/L). Among 207 patients receiving insulin therapy, 1.9% were euglycemic, 20.8% had blood glucose levels < or = 8.3 mmol/L, and 1.0% were hypoglycemic. Overall, mean maximal glucose level was 10.0 +/- 3.6 mmol/L. Perceived adherence to strict glycemic control was 65.9%. Although perceived adherence to recommendations was higher in academic and larger hospitals, actual practice was not significantly influenced by hospital size or university affiliation., Conclusions: This representative survey shows that current therapy of severe sepsis in German intensive care units complies poorly with practice recommendations. Intensive care unit directors perceive adherence to be higher than it actually is. Implementation strategies involving all intensive care unit staff are needed to overcome this gap between current evidence-based knowledge, practice, and perception.

Background: Sound data about the prevalence of acute renal failure (ARF) among patients with severe sepsis and septic shock are lacking. Further, it is not known whether ARF is an independent risk factor for mortality in septic patients or merely an indicator of disease severity., Methods: A prospective cross-sectional one-day prevalence study was carried out in a representative sample of German ICUs, divided into five strata (< 200 beds; 201-400 beds; 401-600 beds; > 600 beds; university hospitals). 3877 patients were screened of whom 415 had severe sepsis and septic shock., Results: Fourteen patients (3.4%) had chronic dialysis-dependent RF and were excluded from analysis. Of the remaining 401 patients, 166 (41.4%) had ARF, as defined by a rise in creatinine above twice the upper limit of normal and/or a drop in urine output to < 0.5 ml/kg bodyweight. Median APACHE II score was 22 in patients with ARF and 16 in patients without ARF (p< 0.0001). Patients with severe sepsis/septic shock had an overall hospital mortality of 55.2%. Hospital mortality in patients with ARF was 67.3% and without ARF 42.8% (p< 0.0001). After adjustment for APACHE II score and age, ARF remained a significant independent risk factor for death [odds ratio (OR) 2.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27-3.52]. Mortality in septic patients was not associated with pre-existing, non-dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease, whereas in dialysis-dependent patients with sepsis mortality increased to 86%., Conclusion: In this representative survey in patients with severe sepsis/septic shock, prevalence of ARF is high with 41.4%. ARF represents a significant independent risk factor for mortality in these patients.

Background: The role of intensive insulin therapy in patients with severe sepsis is uncertain. Fluid resuscitation improves survival among patients with septic shock, but evidence is lacking to support the choice of either crystalloids or colloids., Methods: In a multicenter, two-by-two factorial trial, we randomly assigned patients with severe sepsis to receive either intensive insulin therapy to maintain euglycemia or conventional insulin therapy and either 10% pentastarch, a low-molecular-weight hydroxyethyl starch (HES 200/0.5), or modified Ringer's lactate for fluid resuscitation. The rate of death at 28 days and the mean score for organ failure were coprimary end points., Results: The trial was stopped early for safety reasons. Among 537 patients who could be evaluated, the mean morning blood glucose level was lower in the intensive-therapy group (112 mg per deciliter [6.2 mmol per liter]) than in the conventional-therapy group (151 mg per deciliter [8.4 mmol per liter], P<0.001). However, at 28 days, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the rate of death or the mean score for organ failure. The rate of severe hypoglycemia (glucose level, < or = 40 mg per deciliter [2.2 mmol per liter]) was higher in the intensive-therapy group than in the conventional-therapy group (17.0% vs. 4.1%, P<0.001), as was the rate of serious adverse events (10.9% vs. 5.2%, P=0.01). HES therapy was associated with higher rates of acute renal failure and renal-replacement therapy than was Ringer's lactate., Conclusions: The use of intensive insulin therapy placed critically ill patients with sepsis at increased risk for serious adverse events related to hypoglycemia. As used in this study, HES was harmful, and its toxicity increased with accumulating doses. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00135473.), (2008 Massachusetts Medical Society)

Objective: To determine the prevalence and mortality of ICU patients with severe sepsis in Germany, with consideration of hospital size., Design: Prospective, observational, cross-sectional 1-day point-prevalence study., Setting: 454 ICUs from a representative nationwide sample of 310 hospitals stratified by size. Data were collected via 1-day on-site audits by trained external study physicians. Visits were randomly distributed over 1 year (2003)., Patients: Inflammatory response of all ICU patients was assessed using the ACCP/SCCM consensus conference criteria. Patients with severe sepsis were followed up after 3 months for hospital mortality and length of ICU stay., Measurements and Results: Main outcome measures were prevalence and mortality. A total of 3,877 patients were screened. Prevalence was 12.4% (95% CI, 10.9-13.8%) for sepsis and 11.0% (95% CI, 9.7-12.2%) for severe sepsis including septic shock. The ICU and hospital mortality of patients with severe sepsis was 48.4 and 55.2%, respectively, without significant differences between hospital size. Prevalence and mean length of ICU stay of patients with severe sepsis were significantly higher in larger hospitals and universities (

Objectives: To compare cortisol levels during "low-dose" hydrocortisone therapy to basal and ACTH-stimulated endogenous levels and to assess whether clinical course and the need for catecholamines depend on cortisol levels and/or pretreatment adrenocortical responsiveness.Design and Setting: Prospective observational study in a medical ICU of a university hospital.Patients: Twenty consecutive patients with septic shock and a cardiac index of 3.5 l/min or higher, started on "low-dose" hydrocortisone therapy (100 mg bolus, 10 mg/h for 7 days and subsequent tapering) within 72 h of the onset of shock.Measurements and Results: Basal total and free plasma cortisol levels ranged from 203 to 2169 and from 17 to 372 nmol/l. In 11 patients cortisol production was considered "inadequate" because there was neither a response to ACTH of at least 200 nmol/l nor a baseline level of at least 1000 nmol/l. Following the initiation of hydrocortisone therapy total and free cortisol levels increased 4.2- and 8.5-fold to median levels of 3,587 (interquartile range 2,679-5,220) and 1,210 (interquartile range 750-1,846) nmol/l on day 1, and thereafter declined to median levels of 1,310 nmol/l and 345 nmol/l on day 7. Patients with "inadequate" steroid production could be weaned from vasopressor therapy significantly faster, although their plasma free cortisol concentrations during the hydrocortisone treatment period did not differ.Conclusions: (a) During proposed regimens of "low-dose" hydrocortisone therapy, initially achieved plasma cortisol concentrations considerably exceed basal and ACTH stimulated levels. (b) Cortisol concentrations decline subsequently, despite continuous application of a constant dose. (c) "Inadequate" endogenous steroid production appears to sensitize patients to the hemodynamic effects of a "therapeutic rise" in plasma cortisol levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]