Suppr超能文献

脓毒症-3脓毒性休克定义对先前定义的脓毒性休克患者的影响。

The Impact of the Sepsis-3 Septic Shock Definition on Previously Defined Septic Shock Patients.

作者信息

Sterling Sarah A, Puskarich Michael A, Glass Andrew F, Guirgis Faheem, Jones Alan E

机构信息

1Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS. 2Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Florida College of Medicine-Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL.

出版信息

Crit Care Med. 2017 Sep;45(9):1436-1442. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002512.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The Third International Consensus Definitions Task Force (Sepsis-3) recently recommended changes to the definitions of sepsis. The impact of these changes remains unclear. Our objective was to determine the outcomes of patients meeting Sepsis-3 septic shock criteria versus patients meeting the "old" (1991) criteria of septic shock only.

DESIGN

Secondary analysis of two clinical trials of early septic shock resuscitation.

SETTING

Large academic emergency departments in the United States.

PATIENTS

Patients with suspected infection, more than or equal to two systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria, and systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg after fluid resuscitation.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were further categorized as Sepsis-3 septic shock if they demonstrated hypotension, received vasopressors, and exhibited a lactate greater than 2 mmol/L. We compared in-hospital mortality in patients who met the old definition only with those who met the Sepsis-3 criteria.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Four hundred seventy patients were included in the present analysis. Two hundred (42.5%) met Sepsis-3 criteria, whereas 270 (57.4%) met only the old definition. Patients meeting Sepsis-3 criteria demonstrated higher severity of illness by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (9 vs 5; p < 0.001) and mortality (29% vs 14%; p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis of 127 patients meeting only the old definition demonstrated significant mortality benefit following implementation of a quantitative resuscitation protocol (35% vs 10%; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

In this analysis, 57% of patients meeting old definition for septic shock did not meet Sepsis-3 criteria. Although Sepsis-3 criteria identified a group of patients with increased organ failure and higher mortality, those patients who met the old criteria and not Sepsis-3 criteria still demonstrated significant organ failure and 14% mortality rate.

摘要

目的

第三届国际脓毒症共识定义工作组(脓毒症-3)最近建议对脓毒症的定义进行修改。这些修改的影响尚不清楚。我们的目的是确定符合脓毒症-3感染性休克标准的患者与仅符合“旧”(1991年)感染性休克标准的患者的预后情况。

设计

两项早期感染性休克复苏临床试验的二次分析。

地点

美国大型学术急诊科。

患者

疑似感染、满足或超过两项全身炎症反应综合征标准且液体复苏后收缩压低于90 mmHg的患者。

干预措施

如果患者出现低血压、接受血管活性药物治疗且乳酸水平大于2 mmol/L,则进一步分类为脓毒症-3感染性休克。我们比较了仅符合旧定义的患者与符合脓毒症-3标准的患者的院内死亡率。

测量指标及主要结果

本分析纳入了470例患者。200例(42.5%)符合脓毒症-3标准,而270例(57.4%)仅符合旧定义。符合脓毒症-3标准的患者序贯器官衰竭评估评分显示疾病严重程度更高(9分对5分;p<0.001),死亡率也更高(29%对14%;p<0.001)。对127例仅符合旧定义的患者进行亚组分析显示,实施定量复苏方案后死亡率有显著改善(35%对10%;p = 0.006)。

结论

在此分析中,57%符合感染性休克旧定义的患者不符合脓毒症-3标准。尽管脓毒症-3标准识别出了一组器官衰竭增加且死亡率更高的患者,但那些符合旧标准而不符合脓毒症-3标准的患者仍表现出显著的器官衰竭,死亡率为14%。

相似文献

1
The Impact of the Sepsis-3 Septic Shock Definition on Previously Defined Septic Shock Patients.
Crit Care Med. 2017 Sep;45(9):1436-1442. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002512.
2
Potential Impact of the 2016 Consensus Definitions of Sepsis and Septic Shock on Future Sepsis Research.
Ann Emerg Med. 2017 Oct;70(4):553-561.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2017.04.007.
4
The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3).
JAMA. 2016 Feb 23;315(8):801-10. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0287.
9
International Consensus Criteria for Pediatric Sepsis and Septic Shock.
JAMA. 2024 Feb 27;331(8):665-674. doi: 10.1001/jama.2024.0179.
10
Resuscitation bundle compliance in severe sepsis and septic shock: improves survival, is better late than never.
J Intensive Care Med. 2011 Sep-Oct;26(5):304-13. doi: 10.1177/0885066610392499. Epub 2011 Jan 10.

引用本文的文献

2
Influence of hydrocortisone infusion method on the clinical outcome of patients with septic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
J Intensive Med. 2024 Jun 25;5(1):100-107. doi: 10.1016/j.jointm.2024.05.001. eCollection 2025 Jan.
4
Long-Term Survival of Patients With Cancer, Sepsis, and Vasopressor Requirements Based on Lactate Levels.
Crit Care Explor. 2024 Apr 2;6(4):e1070. doi: 10.1097/CCE.0000000000001070. eCollection 2024 Apr.
5
More attention should be paid to Omicron-associated sepsis: a multicenter retrospective study in south China.
J Thorac Dis. 2024 Feb 29;16(2):1313-1323. doi: 10.21037/jtd-23-808. Epub 2024 Feb 27.
7
Propafenone versus amiodarone for supraventricular arrhythmias in septic shock: a randomised controlled trial.
Intensive Care Med. 2023 Nov;49(11):1283-1292. doi: 10.1007/s00134-023-07208-3. Epub 2023 Sep 12.
9
Risk Factors for Mortality in Sepsis Patients without Lactate Levels Increasing Early.
Emerg Med Int. 2023 Feb 24;2023:6620157. doi: 10.1155/2023/6620157. eCollection 2023.
10
Identifying and analyzing sepsis states: A retrospective study on patients with sepsis in ICUs.
PLOS Digit Health. 2022 Nov 10;1(11):e0000130. doi: 10.1371/journal.pdig.0000130. eCollection 2022 Nov.

本文引用的文献

1
The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3).
JAMA. 2016 Feb 23;315(8):801-10. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.0287.
2
Systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria in defining severe sepsis.
N Engl J Med. 2015 Apr 23;372(17):1629-38. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1415236. Epub 2015 Mar 17.
4
Hyperlactatemia is an independent predictor of mortality and denotes distinct subtypes of severe sepsis and septic shock.
J Crit Care. 2015 Apr;30(2):439.e1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2014.10.027. Epub 2014 Oct 30.
6
Two decades of mortality trends among patients with severe sepsis: a comparative meta-analysis*.
Crit Care Med. 2014 Mar;42(3):625-31. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000026.
7
Update in sepsis 2012.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013 Jun 15;187(12):1303-7. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201303-0567UP.
9
Characteristics and outcomes of patients with vasoplegic versus tissue dysoxic septic shock.
Shock. 2013 Jul;40(1):11-4. doi: 10.1097/SHK.0b013e318298836d.
10
Benchmarking the incidence and mortality of severe sepsis in the United States.
Crit Care Med. 2013 May;41(5):1167-74. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31827c09f8.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验