Comparison of Automated Methods Versus the American Burn Association Sepsis Definition to Identify Sepsis and Sepsis With Organ Dysfunction/Septic Shock in Burn-Injured Adults

Diagnosis and Treatment of Infections in the Burn Patient

Infection is very common in burn patients because they lose the primary barrier from microorganism invasion, the skin. While there are attempts to prevent infections, topical antimicrobials and systemic prophylaxis tend to lead to more resistant organisms. After the initial resuscitation, the most common cause of death is from sepsis and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. The diagnosis is difficult in the burn population because the constant exposure from the open wound leads to an inflammatory response that leads to persistent hypermetabolism. This paper reviews the current understanding and treatment of infection and sepsis in burns.

Surviving Sepsis After Burn Campaign

INTRODUCTION

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign was developed to improve outcomes for all patients with sepsis. Despite sepsis being the primary cause of death after thermal injury, burns have always been excluded from the Surviving Sepsis efforts. To improve sepsis outcomes in burn patients, an international group of burn experts developed the Surviving Sepsis After Burn Campaign (SSABC) as a testable guideline to improve burn sepsis outcomes.

METHODS

The International Society for Burn Injuries (ISBI) reached out to regional or national burn organizations to recommend members to participate in the program. Two members of the ISBI developed specific "patient/population, intervention, comparison and outcome" (PICO) questions that paralleled the 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign [1]. SSABC participants were asked to search the current literature and rate its quality for each topic. At the Congress of the ISBI, in Guadalajara, Mexico, August 28, 2022, a majority of the participants met to create "statements" based on the literature. The "summary statements" were then sent to all members for comment with the hope of developing an 80% consensus. After four reviews, a consensus statement for each topic was created or "no consensus" was reported.

RESULTS

The committee developed sixty statements within fourteen topics that provide guidance for the early treatment of sepsis in burn patients. These statements should be used to improve the care of sepsis in burn patients. The statements should not be considered as "static" comments but should rather be used as guidelines for future testing of the best treatments for sepsis in burn patients. They should be updated on a regular basis.

CONCLUSION

Members of the burn community from the around the world have developed the Surviving Sepsis After Burn Campaign guidelines with the goal of improving the outcome of sepsis in burn patients.

The curative effect of Shenfu-injection in the treatment of burn sepsis and its effect on the patient's immune function, HMGB, and vWF

OBJECTIVE

To investigate and analyze the immune regulatory effect of Shenfu-Injection (SFI) on patients with burn-injured sepsis by monitoring the serum level of high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) and von Willebrand factor (vWF).

METHODS

In this retrospective study, the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE II) score, Marshall score, peripheral blood T lymphocyte count, and NK cell concentration, levels of cytokines such as HMGB-1, and vWF in peripheral blood before and after treatment in patients from the control group (convention treatments, n=51) and the observation group (convention treatments plus SFI treatment, n=57) were analyzed. The prognosis of the two groups of patients at 28 days was analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

After treatment, APACHE II score, Marshall score, IL-6, CPR, HMGB-1, and vWF in patients from the two groups decreased greatly when compared with those before the treatment (P<0.05). The APACHE II score, Marshall score, IL-6, CPR, HMGB-1, and vWF in the group for observation were significantly lower (P<0.05) than those in the control group. Concentrations of CD3⁺, CD4⁺, and NK cells in these two groups after 7 days of treatment were greatly higher than those before the treatment (P<0.05). Concentrations of CD3⁺, CD4⁺, and NK cells in the observation group were higher than those in the control group after treatment (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in terms of mortality between these two groups after 28 days (P<0.05). The average survival time of the non-survivors in the observation group was significantly longer than that in the control group (P<0.05).

CONCLUSION

SFI can effectively improve the immunity of patients with burn-injured sepsis, reduce the expression of cytokines such as HMGB and vWF, and is of great help for the improvement of clinical prognosis.

Contemporary Aspects of Burn Care

The past one hundred years have seen tremendous improvements in burn care, allowing for decreased morbidity and mortality of this pathology. The more prominent advancements occurred in the period spanning 1930-1980; notably burn resuscitation, early tangential excision, and use of topical antibiotic dressings; and are well documented in burn literature. This article explores the advancements of the past 40 years and the areas of burn management that are presently topics of active discussion and research.

Outcomes in Burn-Injured Patients Who Develop Sepsis

This study examines health outcomes in burn patients with sepsis. We hypothesized that burn patients with sepsis would have an increased odds risk for in-hospital death and longer intensive care unit (ICU) stays. This was a retrospective cohort of consecutive patients admitted to the burn ICU with total BSA (TBSA) ≥10% and/or inhalation injury between January 2008 and March 2015. Overall 407 burn patients were included; the case-rate for sepsis was 39.1% (n = 159); 20.1% (n = 82) patients were septic and 18.9% (n = 77) patients experienced septic shock. Patients with septic shock had the highest mortality rate (13.31% no sepsis vs 3.7% sepsis vs 49.4% septic shock, P < .01). Median 28-day ICU-free days was higher in patients without sepsis (23 days [Interquartile range (IQR) 14-27] no sepsis vs 0 days [IQR 0-10] sepsis vs 0 days [IQR 0-0] septic shock, P < .01). Sepsis (with or without shock) increased odds of in-hospital death (odds ratio 7.04, 95% confidence interval 1.93-25.7) in reference to the no sepsis group. With each incremental Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score or 10% TBSA increase, the odds risk for in-hospital death increased by 56 and 75%, respectively. Our study characterized outcomes in patients with sepsis after severe burn injury. The odds risk for in-hospital death was greater in patients with sepsis, increasing burn severity according to TBSA and SOFA score.

Sepsis in the burn patient: a different problem than sepsis in the general population

Sepsis has recently been defined as "life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection". A great amount of effort has been made to develop early treatments for sepsis through the Surviving Sepsis Campaign. There are similar but slightly different recommendations for the treatment of sepsis in the pediatric population. These international efforts have led to earlier diagnosis and treatments for sepsis that have led to improvements in survival. Sepsis is also the leading cause of death in the burn patient but most clinical sepsis studies have excluded burns. The reason for the exclusion is that the sepsis found in burn patients is different than that of the general population. The early treatment strategies, such as those directed by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign, focus on patients presenting to hospitals with recent signs of infection. Burn patients lose their primary barrier to infection, the skin, and thus the risk of infection persists as long as that barrier is absent. Efforts have been made to define sepsis, septic shock and infection in the burn population but there is constant need for revisions. One focus of this review is to discuss the differences in burn sepsis versus sepsis of the general population. Children often have profound responses to sepsis but can also make remarkable recoveries. This review will also explore problems specific to pediatric burns. The treatment of burns requires a continuous vigilance to watch for the subtle early signs of sepsis and then expeditious initiation of aggressive therapy. Strategies covering optimal management of pediatric burn sepsis will also be summarized.

The influence of metabolic imbalances and oxidative stress on the outcome of critically ill polytrauma patients: a review

The critically ill polytrauma patient presents with a series of associated pathophysiologies secondary to the traumatic injuries. The most important include systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), sepsis, oxidative stress (OS), metabolic disorders, and finally multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) and death. The poor outcome of these patients is related to the association of the aforementioned pathologies. The nutrition of the critically ill polytrauma patient is a distinct challenge because of the rapid changes in terms of energetic needs associated with hypermetabolism, sepsis, SIRS, and OS. Moreover, it has been proven that inadequate nutrition can prolong the time spent on a mechanical ventilator and the length of stay in an intensive care unit (ICU). A series of mathematical equations can predict the energy expenditure (EE), but they have disadvantages, such as the fact that they cannot predict the EE accurately in the case of patients with hypermetabolism. Indirect calorimetry (IC) is another method used for evaluating and monitoring the energy status of critically ill patients. In this update paper, we present a series of pathophysiological aspects associated with the metabolic disaster affecting the critically ill polytrauma patient. Furthermore, we present different non-invasive monitoring methods that could help the intensive care physician in the adequate management of this type of patient.