Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008

Cooper University Hospital, Camden, NJ, USA.
Critical care medicine (Impact Factor: 6.15). 02/2008; 36(1):296-327. DOI: 10.1097/01.CCM.0000298158.12101.41
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," published in 2004.
Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding.
We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation (1) indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost) or clearly do not. Weak recommendations (2) indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations.
Key recommendations, listed by category, include early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for postoperative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B), targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization (2C); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); and a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B).
There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Download full-text


Available from: Jean Carlet, Jul 03, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Mid-infrared spectral technology has shown a high degree of promise in detecting glucose in plasma. OptiScan Biomedical has developed a glucose monitor based on mid-infrared spectroscopy that withdraws blood samples and measures plasma glucose. The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and performance of the OptiScanner (TM) 5000 system on different pools of blood. Methods: This study was performed to validate the blood glucose measurements obtained with the OptiScanner (TM) 5000 by comparing them to Central Laboratory glucose measurements (VITROS 5600 Integrated System) as a comparative method across a broad range of glucose values over a three day period to obtain 80-90 paired measurements. Results: A total of 81 paired measurements, distributed between 33 and 320 mg/100 mL of glucose, were performed. The aggregate data points were within International Organization for Standardization standards, with 100% of the glucose values within +/- 15%. Conclusions: The current study suggests that a mid-IR fixed-wavelength system (OptiScanner) can measure glucose accurately across a wide range of glucose values in plasma of ICU patients.
    Clinica Chimica Acta 09/2014; 438. DOI:10.1016/j.cca.2014.09.008 · 2.76 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives: The objective of this paper is to highlight the selected group of patients in which adjuvant therapy seems to have a more pronounced positive effect. Design and methods: 65 septic patients from the prospective observational study Se-AOX (2008-2012) ( Identifier: NCT02026856) were divided into a Se group, receiving sodium selenite in a continual infusion of 750 mu g/24 h for 6 days, and a placebo group. They were subsequently divided into subgroups according to the initial Carrico index (CI) on the day of admission: CI > 200 and CI < 200. Dynamical changes in glutathione peroxidase (GPx), glutathione reductase (GR) and superoxide dismutase activities were recorded at two day intervals. Clinical parameters and mortality were compared. Results: The CI increased in subgroup Se-CI < 200 with negative correlation against subgroup Placebo-CI < 200 during the last measuring period (p < 0.02). GPx activity increased in selenium subgroups with negative correlation against placebo subgroups (p < 0.01). SOD activity was elevated in all subgroups in comparison with values of healthy subjects. Conclusions: Adjuvant selenium therapy seems to be beneficial for a selected group of patients with acute lung injury. However, as is clear from the results discussed, this is not the case with persistent renal failure, as this leads to an inability to maintain synthetic renal function and ensure GPx synthesis.
    Clinical Biochemistry 07/2014; 47(15). DOI:10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2014.07.004 · 2.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We compared a commercial broad range 16S rRNA gene PCR assay (SepsiTest) to an in-house developed assay (IHP). We assessed whether CD64 index, a biomarker of bacterial infection, can be used to exclude patients with a low probability of systemic bacterial infection. From January to March 2010, 23 patients with suspected sepsis were enrolled. CD64 index, procalcitonin, and C-reactive protein were measured on admission. Broad range 16S rRNA gene PCR was performed from whole blood (SepsiTest) or blood plasma (IHP) and compared to blood culture results. Blood samples spiked with Staphylococcus aureus were used to assess sensitivity of the molecular assays in vitro. CD64 index was lower in patients where possible sepsis was excluded than in patients with microbiologically confirmed sepsis (íµí±ƒ = 0.004). SepsiTest identified more relevant pathogens than blood cultures (íµí±ƒ = 0.008); in three patients (13%) results from blood culture and SepsiTest were congruent, whereas in four cases (17.4%) relevant pathogens were detected by SepsiTest only. In vitro spiking experiments suggested equal sensitivity of SepsiTest and IHP. A diagnostic algorithm using CD64 index as a decision maker to perform SepsiTest shows improved detection of pathogens in patients with suspected blood stream infection and may enable earlier targeted antibiotic therapy.
    Mediators of Inflammation 07/2014; 2014. DOI:10.1155/2014/108592 · 2.42 Impact Factor