Single versus divided administration of intravenous immunoglobulin for sepsis: a retrospective and historical control study

Expert consensus on the monitoring and treatment of sepsis-induced immunosuppression

Emerged evidence has indicated that immunosuppression is involved in the occurrence and development of sepsis. To provide clinical practice recommendations on the immune function in sepsis, an expert consensus focusing on the monitoring and treatment of sepsis-induced immunosuppression was developed. Literature related to the immune monitoring and treatment of sepsis were retrieved from PubMed, Web of Science, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure to design items and expert opinions were collected through an online questionnaire. Then, the Delphi method was used to form consensus opinions, and RAND appropriateness method was developed to provide consistency evaluation and recommendation levels for consensus opinions. This consensus achieved satisfactory results through two rounds of questionnaire survey, with 2 statements rated as perfect consistency, 13 as very good consistency, and 9 as good consistency. After summarizing the results, a total of 14 strong recommended opinions, 8 weak recommended opinions and 2 non-recommended opinions were produced. Finally, a face-to-face discussion of the consensus opinions was performed through an online meeting, and all judges unanimously agreed on the content of this consensus. In summary, this expert consensus provides a preliminary guidance for the monitoring and treatment of immunosuppression in patients with sepsis.

Outcomes of ICU patients treated with intravenous immunoglobulin for sepsis or autoimmune diseases

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the outcomes of hospitalized patients in two intensive care units (ICU) treated with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) added to standard-of-care therapy. The indications for IVIg therapy were sepsis or autoimmune disease.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study involving adult patients with sepsis and autoimmune diseases, who received IVIg in the ICU at Wolfson and Sheba Medical Centers. A predefined chart was compiled on Excel to include a complete demographic collection, patient comorbidities, chronic medication use, disease severity scores (Charlson Comorbidity Index; SOFA and APACHE II index scores), indication and dosage of IVIg administration, duration of hospitalization and mortality rates.

RESULTS

Patients (n - 111) were divided into 2 groups: patients with sepsis only (n-67) and patients with autoimmune disease only (n-44). Septic patients had a shorter ICU stay, received IVIg early, and had reduced mortality if treated with high dose IVIg. Patients with autoimmune diseases did not have a favorable outcome despite IVIg treatment. In this group, IVIg was administered later than in the sepsis group.

CONCLUSIONS

IVIg therapy improved the outcomes for ICU patients with sepsis.

Intravenous immunoglobulin for adjunctive treatment of severe infections in ICUs

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review focuses on the emerging literature regarding the use of intravenous immunoglobulins (IVIg) in critically ill patients with severe infections. The aim is to provide an accessible summary of the most recent evidence of IVIg use in sepsis and septic shock and to help clinicians to understand why there is still equipoise regarding the potential benefit of this adjunctive therapy in this setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

Observational studies with propensity score matching analyses and investigating the effect of IVIg in severe infections including necrotizing soft tissue infection have been recently published. These studies suffer important flaws precluding robust conclusion to be drawn. Some recent randomized controlled trials raised interesting findings supportive of personalized medicine but are likely to be underpowered or confounded.

SUMMARY

Insufficient evidence is available to support IVIg use in sepsis and septic shock, apart from the specific case of streptococcal toxic shock syndrome. Current literature suggests that IVIg efficacy in sepsis or septic shock could depend on the IVIg preparation (IgM-enriched or minimal IgM), time of administration (<24 h), dose, and the inflammatory/immunomodulation profile of the patients. Investigator-initiated research, incorporating these parameters, is warranted to determine whether IVIg benefits critically ill patients with severe infection.