Robustness of sepsis-3 criteria in critically ill patients

Sepsis and delayed cerebral ischemia are associated and have a cumulative effect on poor functional outcome in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage

Objective

Although sepsis and delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) are severe complications in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) and share pathophysiological features, their interrelation and additive effect on functional outcome is uncertain. We investigated the association between sepsis and DCI and their cumulative effect on functional outcome in patients with aSAH using current sepsis-3 definition.

Methods

Patients admitted to our hospital between 11/2014 and 11/2018 for aSAH were retrospectively analyzed. The main explanatory variable was sepsis, diagnosed using sepsis-3 criteria. Endpoints were DCI and functional outcome at hospital discharge (modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-3 vs. 4-6). Propensity score matching (PSM) and multivariable logistic regressions were performed.

Results

Of 238 patients with aSAH, 55 (23.1%) developed sepsis and 74 (31.1%) DCI. After PSM, aSAH patients with sepsis displayed significantly worse functional outcome (p < 0.01) and longer ICU stay (p = 0.046). Sepsis was independently associated with DCI (OR = 2.46, 95%CI: 1.28-4.72, p < 0.01). However, after exclusion of patients who developed sepsis before (OR = 1.59, 95%CI: 0.78-3.24, p = 0.21) or after DCI (OR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.37-1.95, p = 0.70) this statistical association did not remain. Good functional outcome gradually decreased from 56.3% (76/135) in patients with neither sepsis nor DCI, to 43.8% (21/48) in those with no sepsis but DCI, to 34.5% (10/29) with sepsis but no DCI and to 7.7% (2/26) in patients with both sepsis and DCI.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrates a strong association between sepsis, DCI and functional outcome in patients with aSAH and suggests a complex interplay resulting in a cumulative effect towards poor functional outcome, which warrants further studies.

Big data insights into the diagnostic values of CBC parameters for sepsis and septic shock in burn patients: a retrospective study

Sepsis and septic shock are prevalent and life-threatening complications in burn patients. Despite their severity, existing diagnostic methods are limited. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of Complete Blood Count (CBC) and CBC ratio markers in diagnosing sepsis and septic shock, and in predicting mortality among burn patients. A cohort of 2757 burn patients was examined to ascertain the correlation between various CBC parameters, their ratios, and the incidence of sepsis and related mortality. Key markers analyzed included Red Cell Distribution Width (RDW), Mean Platelet Volume (MPV), Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR), Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (PLR), and Mean Platelet Volume-to-Platelet Ratio (MPVPR). Our findings indicate that 65.5% of the patients developed sepsis, and 24.3% succumbed to their conditions. The CBC parameters RDW, MPV, NLR, MPVPR, and MPV-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (MPVLR) were significantly associated with sepsis and mortality. These markers showed considerable temporal variation and yielded an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of over 0.65 in an unadjusted Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) model. This study underscores the potential of RDW, MPV, NLR, MPVPR, and MPVLR as vital prognostic tools for diagnosing sepsis, septic shock, and predicting mortality in burn patients. Although based on a single-center dataset, our results contribute to the enhancement of sepsis management by facilitating earlier, more precise diagnosis and treatment strategies. Further multi-center research is necessary to confirm these findings and broaden their applicability, establishing a solid base for future explorations in this crucial field.

Evidence-based updates to the 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines: Part 1: Background, pathophysiology, and emerging treatments

ABSTRACT

Sepsis identification and treatment has changed significantly over the last few decades. Despite this, sepsis is still associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This first of a two-part series reviews the history of modern sepsis and presents new research in pathophysiology, treatment, and postsepsis care.

Septic shock 3.0 criteria application in severe COVID-19 patients: An unattended sepsis population with high mortality risk

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can be associated with life-threatening organ dysfunction due to septic shock, frequently requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission, respiratory and vasopressor support. Therefore, clear clinical criteria are pivotal for early recognition of patients more likely to need prompt organ support. Although most patients with severe COVID-19 meet the Sepsis-3.0 criteria for septic shock, it has been increasingly recognized that hyperlactatemia is frequently absent, possibly leading to an underestimation of illness severity and mortality risk.

AIM

To identify the proportion of severe COVID-19 patients with vasopressor support requirements, with and without hyperlactatemia, and describe their clinical outcomes and mortality.

METHODS

We performed a single-center prospective cohort study. All adult patients admitted to the ICU with COVID-19 were included in the analysis and were further divided into three groups: Sepsis group, without both criteria; Vasoplegic Shock group, with persistent hypotension and vasopressor support without hyperlactatemia; and Septic Shock 3.0 group, with both criteria. COVID-19 was diagnosed using clinical and radiologic criteria with a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) positive RT-PCR test.

RESULTS

118 patients (mean age 63 years, 87% males) were included in the analysis (n = 51 Sepsis group, n = 26 Vasoplegic Shock group, and n = 41 Septic Shock 3.0 group). SOFA score at ICU admission and ICU length of stay were different between the groups (P < 0.001). Mortality was significantly higher in the Vasoplegic Shock and Septic Shock 3.0 groups when compared with the Sepsis group (P < 0.001) without a significant difference between the former two groups (P = 0.713). The log rank tests of Kaplan-Meier survival curves were also different (P = 0.007). Ventilator-free days and vasopressor-free days were different between the Sepsis vs Vasoplegic Shock and Septic Shock 3.0 groups (both P < 0.001), and similar in the last two groups (P = 0.128 and P = 0.133, respectively). Logistic regression identified the maximum dose of vasopressor therapy used (AOR 1.046; 95%CI: 1.012-1.082, P = 0.008) and serum lactate level (AOR 1.542; 95%CI: 1.055-2.255, P = 0.02) as the major explanatory variables of mortality rates (R² 0.79).

CONCLUSION

In severe COVID-19 patients, the Sepsis 3.0 criteria of septic shock may exclude approximately one third of patients with a similarly high risk of a poor outcome and mortality rate, which should be equally addressed.

Comparative Analyses of the Impact of Different Criteria for Sepsis Diagnosis on Outcome in Patients with Spontaneous Subarachnoid Hemorrhage

Data on sepsis in patients with a subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) are scarce. We assessed the impact of different sepsis criteria on the outcome in an SAH cohort. Adult patients admitted to our ICU with a spontaneous SAH between 11/2014 and 11/2018 were retrospectively included. In patients developing an infection, different criteria for sepsis diagnosis (Sepsis-1, Sepsis-3_original, Sepsis-3_modified accounting for SAH-specific therapy, alternative sepsis criteria compiled of consensus conferences) were applied and their impact on functional outcome using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) on hospital discharge and in-hospital mortality was evaluated. Of 270 SAH patients, 129 (48%) developed an infection. Depending on the underlying criteria, the incidence of sepsis and septic shock ranged between 21–46% and 9–39%. In multivariate logistic regression, the Sepsis-1 criteria were not associated with the outcome. The Sepsis-3 criteria were not associated with the functional outcome, but in shock with mortality. Alternative sepsis criteria were associated with mortality for sepsis and in shock with mortality and the functional outcome. While Sepsis-1 criteria were irrelevant for the outcome in SAH patients, septic shock, according to the Sepsis-3 criteria, adversely impacted survival. This impact was higher for the modified Sepsis-3 criteria, accounting for SAH-specific treatment. Modified Sepsis-3 and alternative sepsis criteria diagnosed septic conditions of a higher relevance for outcomes in patients with an SAH.

Epidemiology of sepsis and septic shock

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The epidemiology of sepsis and septic shock has been challenging to study for multiple reasons. These include changing diagnostic definitions, as well a high concentration of sepsis-related studies published from high-income countries (HICs), despite a large global burden. This section attempts to address the incidence of sepsis throughout the years and worldwide.

RECENT FINDINGS

The incidence of sepsis and septic shock has continued to increase since the first consensus definitions (Sepsis-1) were established in 1991, and the latest definitions (Sepsis-3) provide a better reflection of mortality risk for a diagnosis of sepsis. Several studies argue that the incidence of sepsis is overreported in HICs, based on billing and coding practices, and may lead to overutilization of resources. However, recent estimates of the true global burden of sepsis, including low-income countries, are likely much higher than reported, with calls for better allocation of resources.

SUMMARY

The true epidemiology of sepsis worldwide continues to be a highly debated subject, and more research is needed among low-income countries and high-risk subpopulations.

Impact of different consensus definition criteria on sepsis diagnosis in a cohort of critically ill patients-Insights from a new mathematical probabilistic approach to mortality-based validation of sepsis criteria

Background

Sepsis-3 definition uses SOFA score to discriminate sepsis from uncomplicated infection, replacing SIRS criteria that were criticized for being inaccurate. Eligibility of sepsis-3 criteria for sepsis diagnosis and the applied validation methodology using mortality as endpoint are topic of ongoing debate. We assessed the impact of different criteria on sepsis diagnosis in our ICU and devised a mathematical approach for mortality-based validation of sepsis criteria. As infectious status is often unclear at clinical deterioration, we integrated non-infected patients into analysis.

Methods

Suspected infection, SOFA and SIRS were captured for an ICU cohort of a university center over one year. For raw scores (SIRS/SOFA) and sepsis criteria (SIRS≥2/SOFA≥2/SOFA_change≥2) frequencies and associations with in-hospital mortality were assessed. Using a mathematical approach, we estimated the correlation between sepsis and in-hospital mortality serving as reference for evaluation of observed mortality correlations of sepsis criteria.

Results

Of 791 patients, 369 (47%) were infected and 422 (53%) non-infected, with an in-hospital mortality of 39% and 15%. SIRS≥2 indicated sepsis in 90% of infected patients, SOFA≥2 in 99% and SOFA_change≥2 in 77%. In non-infected patients, SIRS, SOFA and SOFA_change were ≥2 in 78%, 88% and 58%. In AUROC analyses neither SOFA nor SIRS displayed superior mortality discrimination in infected compared to non-infected patients. The mathematically estimated correlation of sepsis and in-hospital mortality was 0.10 in infected and 0 in non-infected patients. Among sepsis criteria, solely SIRS≥2 agreed with expected correlations in both subgroups (infected: r = 0.19; non-infected: r = 0.02).

Conclusions

SOFA≥2 yielded a more liberal sepsis diagnosis than SIRS≥2. None of the criteria showed an infection specific occurrence that would be essential for reliable sepsis detection. However, SIRS≥2 matched the mortality association pattern of a valid sepsis criterion, whereas SOFA-based criteria did not. With this study, we establish a mathematical approach to mortality-based evaluation of sepsis criteria.

Sepsis and Cerebral Dysfunction: BBB Damage, Neuroinflammation, Oxidative Stress, Apoptosis and Autophagy as Key Mediators and the Potential Therapeutic Approaches

Sepsis-associated cerebral dysfunction is complex pathophysiology, generated from primary infections that are developed elsewhere in the body. The neonates, elderly population and chronically ill and long-term hospitalized patients are predominantly vulnerable to sepsis and related cerebral damage. Generally, electrophysiological recordings, severity and sedation scales, computerized imaging and spectroscopy techniques are used for its detection and diagnosis. About the underlying mechanisms, enhanced blood-brain barrier permeability and metalloprotease activity, tight junction protein loss and endothelial cell degeneration promote the influx of inflammatory and toxic mediators into the brain, triggering cerebrovascular damage. An altered neutrophil count and phenotype further dysregulate the normal neuroimmune responses and neuroendocrine stability via modulated activation of protein kinase C-delta, nuclear factor kappa-B and sphingolipid signaling. Glial activation, together with pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines and the Toll-like receptor, destabilize the immune system. Moreover, superoxides and hydroperoxides generate oxidative stress and perturb mitochondrial dynamics and ATP synthesis, propagating neuronal injury cycle. Activated mitochondrial apoptotic pathway, characterized by increased caspase-3 and caspase-9 cleavage and Bax/Bcl2 ratio in the hippocampal and cortical neurons, stimulate neurocognitive impairments. Additionally, altered LC3-II/I and P62/SQSTM1, p-mTOR, p-AMPK1 and p-ULK1 levels and dysregulated autophagosome-lysosome fusion decrease neuronal and glial energy homeostasis. The therapies and procedures for attenuating sepsis-induced brain damage include early resuscitation, cerebral blood flow autoregulation, implantable electric vagus nerve stimulation, antioxidants, statins, glucocorticoids, neuroimmune axis modulators and PKCδ inhibitors. The current review enumerates the pathophysiology of sepsis-induced brain damage, its diagnosis, the role of critical inducers and mediators and, ultimately, therapeutic measures attenuating cerebrovascular degeneration.

Epidemiology of sepsis and septic shock in intensive care units between sepsis-2 and sepsis-3 populations: sepsis prognostication in intensive care unit and emergency room (SPICE-ICU)

Background

Diagnosing sepsis remains difficult because it is not a single disease but a syndrome with various pathogen- and host factor-associated symptoms. Sepsis-3 was established to improve risk stratification among patients with infection based on organ failures, but it has been still controversial compared with previous definitions. Therefore, we aimed to describe characteristics of patients who met sepsis-2 (severe sepsis) and sepsis-3 definitions.

Methods

This was a multicenter, prospective cohort study conducted by 22 intensive care units (ICUs) in Japan. Adult patients (≥ 16 years) with newly suspected infection from December 2017 to May 2018 were included. Those without infection at final diagnosis were excluded. Patient’s characteristics and outcomes were described according to whether they met each definition or not.

Results

In total, 618 patients with suspected infection were admitted to 22 ICUs during the study, of whom 530 (85.8%) met the sepsis-2 definition and 569 (92.1%) met the sepsis-3 definition. The two groups comprised different individuals, and 501 (81.1%) patients met both definitions. In-hospital mortality of study population was 19.1%. In-hospital mortality among patients with sepsis-2 and sepsis-3 patients was comparable (21.7% and 19.8%, respectively). Patients exclusively identified with sepsis-2 or sepsis-3 had a lower mortality (17.2% vs. 4.4%, respectively). No patients died if they did not meet any definitions. Patients who met sepsis-3 shock definition had higher in-hospital mortality than those who met sepsis-2 shock definition.

Conclusions

Most patients with infection admitted to ICU meet sepsis-2 and sepsis-3 criteria. However, in-hospital mortality did not occur if patients did not meet any criteria. Better criteria might be developed by better selection and combination of elements in both definitions.

Trial registration

UMIN000027452

Back to Basics: Recognition of Sepsis with New Definition

Patients with serious infections at risk of deterioration represent highly challenging clinical situations, and in particular for junior doctors. A comprehensive clinical examination that integrates the assessment of vital signs, hemodynamics, and peripheral perfusion into clinical decision making is key to responding promptly and effectively to evolving acute medical illnesses, such as sepsis or septic shock. Against this background, the new concept of sepsis definition may provide a useful link between junior doctors and consultant decision making. The purpose of this article is to introduce the updated definition of sepsis and suggest its practical implications, with particular emphasis on integrative clinical assessment, allowing for the rapid identification of patients who are at risk of further deterioration.