Severe sepsis and septic shock: improving outcomes in the emergency department

Prognostic role of albumin, lactate-to-albumin ratio and C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio in infected patients

INTRODUCTION

The prognostic evaluation of the septic patient has recently been enriched by some predictive indices such as albumin concentration, lactate/albumin ratio (LAR) and C-reactive protein/albumin ratio (CAR). The performance of these indices has been evaluated in septic patients in intensive care, but until now their performance in infected patients in the Emergency Department (ED) has not been evaluated.

AIM

To investigate the potential prognostic role of albumin, LAR and CAR in patients with infection in the ED.

METHODS

Single-centre prospective study performed between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2021 at the ED of the Merano Hospital (Italy). All patients with infection were enrolled. The study outcome was death within 30 days. The predictive ability of albumin, LAR and CAR was assessed by area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs). A multivariate logistic regression model was used to examine the association of the indices with 30-day mortality, with comorbidity, acute urgency and severity of infection as covariates.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 962 patients with an infectious status. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 8.9% (86/962). The AUROC of albumin was 0.831 (95% CI 0.795-868), while for LAR this was 0.773 (CI95% 0.719-0.827) and for CAR 0.718 (CI95% 0.664-0.771). The odds ratio for 30-day mortality for albumin was 3.362 (95% CI 1.904-5.936), for ln(LAR) 2.651 (95% CI 1.646-4.270) and for ln(CAR) 1.739 (95% CI 1.326-2.281).

CONCLUSIONS

All three indices had a good discriminatory ability for the risk of short-term death in patients with infection, indicating their promising use in the ED as well as in the ICU. Further studies are needed to confirm the better performance of albumin compared to LAR and CAR.

Evaluation of prognostic value of MEDS, MEWS, and CURB-65 criteria and sepsis I and sepsis III criteria in patients with community-acquired infection in emergency department

Background:

Early and effective treatment of patients with sepsis requires early recognition in emergency department and understanding the severity of the disease. Many studies have been conducted for this purpose, and many of scoring systems have been developed that provide early recognition of these patients and show their severity.

Objectives:

The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of the scoring systems used to determine the mortality of patients with infections admitted in emergency department.

Methods:

In all, 400 patients who admitted to Uludağ University Hospital Emergency Department were prospectively included in this study. In addition to Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome score, Quick SOFA score, Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis score, Modified Early Warning Score, and Charlson Comorbidity Index score in all patients, CURB-65 score was calculated in the patients diagnosed with pneumonia. It has been aimed to determine the power of these scores’ predictive mortality rates and their superiority to each other.

Results:

It was found that Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis score and Quick SOFA score could be used with similar efficacy (respectively p = 0.761 and p = 0.073) in determining early mortality in emergency department (5th and 14th days) and that MEDS score was more effective (p < 0.001) in predicting the 28th-day mortality. While these recommendations were valid in patients diagnosed with pneumonia, it was determined that CURB-65 score could also be used to estimate 5th-, 14th-, and 28th-day mortalities (respectively, for the 5th day, p = 0.894 and p = 0.256; for the 14th day, p = 0.425 and p = 0.098; and for the 28th day, p = 0.095 and p = 0.158). The power of Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome score, previously used to identify sepsis, in predicting mortality was detected to be lower.

Conclusion:

Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis score and Quick SOFA score could be used with similar efficacy in determining early mortality in emergency department. However, if you want to predict 28th-day mortality rate, it can be better to use Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis score or CURB-65 (in patients diagnosed with pneumonia).

HSP-Target of Therapeutic Agents in Sepsis Treatment

Sepsis is a syndrome characterized by a dysregulated inflammatory response, cellular stress, and organ injury. Sepsis is the main cause of death in intensive care units worldwide, creating need for research and new therapeutic strategies. Heat shock protein (HSP) analyses have recently been developed in the context of sepsis. HSPs have a cytoprotection role in stress conditions, signal to immune cells, and activate the inflammatory response. Hence, HSP analyses have become an important focus in sepsis research, including the investigation of HSPs targeted by therapeutic agents used in sepsis treatment. Many therapeutic agents have been tested, and their HSP modulation showed promising results. Nonetheless, the heterogeneity in experimental designs and the diversity in therapeutic agents used make it difficult to understand their efficacy in sepsis treatment. Therefore, future investigations should include the analysis of parameters related to the early and late immune response in sepsis, HSP localization (intra or extracellular), and time to the onset of treatment after sepsis. They also should consider the differences in experimental sepsis models. In this review, we present the main results of studies on therapeutic agents in targeting HSPs in sepsis treatment. We also discuss limitations and possibilities for future investigations regarding HSP modulators.

Usefulness of qSOFA and SIRS scores for detection of incipient sepsis in general ward patients: A prospective cohort study

PURPOSE

To prospectively assess the diagnostic value of quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) and systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) scores for sepsis in ward patients with infections.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients admitted with infection or developing infection during hospital stay were included. All variables for calculating qSOFA, SIRS, and SOFA scores were collected, and the maximum scores were determined until hospital discharge, death, or day 28, whichever occurred earlier. The primary outcome was sepsis at 28 days. Diagnostic and prognostic values were assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) with the conventional cutoff value of 2.

RESULTS

Of 409 general ward patients, 146 patients and 371 patients met qSOFA and SIRS criteria, 229 patients developed sepsis. Although qSOFA score had a better overall diagnostic performance of sepsis (AUROC 0.75 vs. 0.69), it had a much lower sensitivity (53% vs. 98%) and higher specificity (87% vs. 18%) than SIRS score. In addition, qSOFA score had a better prognostic value than SIRS score (AUROC 0.86 vs. 0.67).

CONCLUSIONS

Neither SIRS score nor qSOFA score could serve as an ideal screening tool for early identification sepsis, whereas qSOFA score might help to identify patients with higher risk of poor clinical outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02930070.

Practical Considerations in Sepsis Resuscitation

BACKGROUND

Sepsis is a common condition managed in the emergency department, and the majority of patients respond to resuscitation measures, including antibiotics and i.v. fluids. However, a proportion of patients will fail to respond to standard treatment.

OBJECTIVE

This review elucidates practical considerations for management of sepsis in patients who fail to respond to standard treatment.

DISCUSSION

Early goal-directed therapy revolutionized sepsis management. However, there is a paucity of literature that provides a well-defined treatment algorithm for patients who fail to improve with therapy. Refractory shock can be defined as continued patient hemodynamic instability (mean arterial pressure, ≤ 65 mm Hg, lactate ≥ 4 mmol/L, altered mental status) after adequate fluid loading (at least 30 mL/kg i.v.), the use of two vasopressors (with one as norepinephrine), and provision of antibiotics. When a lack of improvement is evident in the early stages of resuscitation, systematically considering source control, appropriate volume resuscitation, adequate antimicrobial coverage, vasopressor selection, presence of metabolic pathology, and complications of resuscitation, such as abdominal compartment syndrome and respiratory failure, allow emergency physicians to address the entire clinical scenario.

CONCLUSIONS

The care of sepsis has experienced many changes in recent years. Care of the patient with sepsis who is not responding appropriately to initial resuscitation is troublesome for emergency physicians. This review provides practical considerations for resuscitation of the patient with septic shock. When a septic patient is refractory to standard therapy, systematically evaluating the patient and clinical course may lead to improved outcomes.

Early identification and management of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock in the emergency department

Severe sepsis and septic shock have great relevance to Emergency Medicine physicians because of their high prevalence, morbidity, and mortality. Treatment is time-sensitive, depends on early identification risk stratification, and has the potential to significantly improve patient outcomes. In this article, we review the pathophysiology of, and evidence basis for, the emergency department management of severe sepsis and septic shock.

Microbial diagnostics in patients with presumed severe infection in the emergency department

INTRODUCTION

Sepsis in the early stage is a common disease in emergency medicine, and rapid diagnosis is essential. Our aim was to compare pathogen diagnosis using blood cultures (BC) and the multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test.Methods. At total of 211 patients admitted to the multidisciplinary emergency department of our university hospital between 2006 and 2009 with suspected severe infection from any origin were studied. Blood samples for BC (aerobic and anaerobic) and multiplex PCR were taken for identification of infectious microorganisms immediately after hospital admission. Results of the BC and PCR correlated with procalcitonin concentration (PCT) and clinical diagnosis of sepsis (≥2 positive SIRS criteria) as well as with severity of disease at admission and with clinical outcome measures.

RESULTS

Results of the BC were available in 200 patients (94.8%) and PCR were available in 119 patients (56.3%), respectively. In total, 87 BC (43.5%) were positive and identified 94 pathogens. In 45 positive PCRs, 47 pathogens (37.8%) were found. Identical results were obtained in 81.4%. In addition, BC identified 9 Gram-positive and 3 Gram-negative bacteria, while PCR added 5 Gram-negative pathogens. Coagulase-negative staphylococci were detected in blood cultures only (n=20, 21.3%), whereas PCR identified significantly more Gram-negative bacteria than BC. In patients with positive PCR results, the PCT level was significantly higher than in patients with negative PCR (15.0±23.3 vs. 8.8±32.8 ng/ml, p<0.001). This difference was not observed for BC (10.6±25.7 vs. 11.6±44.9 ng/ml, p=0.075). The APACHE II score correlated with PCR (19.2±9.1 vs. 15.8±8.9, p<0.05) and was also higher in positive BC (18.7±8.7 vs. 14.4±8.0, p<0.01). Positive PCR and BC were correlated with negative clinical outcomes (e.g., transfer to ICU, mechanical ventilation, renal replacement therapy, death).

CONCLUSION

In patients admitted with suspected severe infection, a high percentage of positive BC and PCR were observed. Positive findings in the PCR correlate with elevated levels of PCT and high APACHE II scores.

Time to effective antibiotic administration in adult patients with septic shock: a descriptive analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the median time to antibiotic administration following the onset of septic shock at our institution as well as the appropriateness of empiric therapy, sources of delay in antibiotic administration and the effect of delays on survival.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Retrospective health record review of 55 patients with septic shock admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) between July 1, 2008 and December 31, 2009.

SETTING

Nine-bed adult medical-surgical ICU within a 300-bed community acute care hospital.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Median time to antibiotic administration, appropriateness of empiric therapy, sources of delay in antibiotic administration.

RESULTS

The median (min,max) time to the initiation of antibiotics was determined to be 1.7 (0,31) hours. Only 34% (19/55) of patients received antibiotics within the recommended one hour. Empiric antibiotic therapy was determined to be appropriate in 91% (50/55) of patients. The median (min,max) time to administration of effective antibiotic therapy tended to be faster in the emergency room [1.1 (0,16) hours] compared to the ICU [2.3 (0,13)].

CONCLUSION

The median time to antibiotic administration at our institution following the onset of septic shock was longer than the evidence-based guideline recommendations of within one hour.

Multimarker panels in sepsis

Biomarkers differentiate between 2 or more biologic states. The complexity of diseases like sepsis makes it unlikely that any single marker will allow for precise disease specification. Combining several biomarkers into a single classification rule should help to improve their accuracy and, therefore, their usefulness. This article reviews several studies using multimarker panels, and highlights the potential of more sophisticated diagnostic and prognostic techniques in future multimarker panels. More complex algorithms should accelerate the adoption of multimarker panels into the routine management of patients with sepsis, provided that clinicians understand the multimarker approach.

Implementation of early goal-directed therapy for septic patients in the emergency department: a review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign outlines the elements of early goal-directed therapy when treating patients with sepsis in the emergency department. The success of these guidelines relies on their implementation in order to attain optimal patient outcomes. The purpose of this article is to review the literature regarding the implementation of the sepsis guidelines in emergency departments.

METHODS

Using the search terms systemic inflammatory response syndrome, emergency service, and sepsis, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health, MEDLINE, and Cochrane database were searched for information pertaining to implementing early goal-directed therapy for sepsis in the emergency department.

RESULTS

Studies that discussed collaboration, preplanning, and education were able to implement monitoring of central venous pressure, mean arterial pressure, and central venous oxygen saturation. However, nursing interventions recommended by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign such as measuring urine output and obtaining blood cultures were less often considered.

DISCUSSION

This review provides some factors important for the successful implementation of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines. Operational and system issues significantly influenced the success of implementing sepsis protocols or bundles. More research is needed to overcome barriers to implementing early goal-directed therapy and to uncover which elements of the guidelines are most important and feasible to achieve optimal patient outcomes.