Intensive Care Med (2013) 39:165–228DOI 10.1007/s00134-012-2769-8 GUIDELINESR. P. DellingerMitchell M. Levy Surviving Sepsis Campaign: InternationalAndrew Rhodes Guidelines for Management of Severe SepsisDjillali AnnaneHerwig Gerlach and Septic Shock, 2012Steven M. OpalJonathan E. SevranskyCharles L. SprungIvor S. DouglasRoman JaeschkeTiffany M. OsbornMark E. NunnallySean R. TownsendKonrad ReinhartRuth M. KleinpellDerek C. AngusClifford S. DeutschmanFlavia R. MachadoGordon D. RubenfeldSteven WebbRichard J. BealeJean-Louis VincentRui MorenoThe Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committeeincluding The Pediatric Subgroup* of Hospital Medicine, Surgical Infection R. P. Dellinger ())Received: 4 June 2012 Society, World Federation of Critical Care Cooper University Hospital,Accepted: 12 November 2012 Nurses, World Federation of PediatricPublished online: 30 January 2013 Camden, NJ, USA Intensive and Critical Care Societies; World e-mail: Dellinger-Phil@CooperHealth.eduÓ SCCM and ESICM 2013 Federation of Societies of Intensive and Critical Care Medicine. Participation andSponsoring organizations: American endorsement: The German Sepsis Society M. M. LevyAssociation of Critical-Care Nurses, and the Latin American Sepsis Institute. Warren Alpert Medical School of BrownAmerican College of Chest Physicians, University, Providence, RI, USAAmerican College of Emergency * Members of the 2012 SSC GuidelinesPhysicians, American Thoracic Society, Committee and Pediatric Subgroup are A. RhodesAsia Paciﬁc Association of Critical Care listed in Appendix 1 at the end of this St. George’s Hospital, London, UKMedicine, Australian and New Zealand article.Intensive Care Society, Brazilian Society of D. AnnaneCritical Care, Canadian Critical Care This article is being simultaneously ˆ ´ Hopital Raymond Poincare,Society, Chinese Society of Critical Care published in Critical Care Medicine andMedicine, Chinese Society of Critical Care Intensive Care Medicine. Garches, FranceMedicine—China Medical Association,Emirates Intensive Care Society, European For additional information regarding this H. GerlachRespiratory Society, European Society of article, contact R.P. Dellinger (Dellinger- ¨ Vivantes-Klinikum Neukolln,Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Phil@CooperHealth.edu). Berlin, GermanyDiseases, European Society of IntensiveCare Medicine, European Society of S. M. OpalPediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care, Memorial Hospital of Rhode Island,Infectious Diseases Society of America, Pawtucket, RI, USAIndian Society of Critical Care Medicine,International Pan Arabian Critical Care J. E. SevranskyMedicine Society, Japanese Association for Emory University Hospital,Acute Medicine, Japanese Society ofIntensive Care Medicine, Pediatric Acute Atlanta, GA, USALung Injury and Sepsis Investigators,Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, C. L. SprungSociety of Critical Care Medicine, Society Hadassah Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
166I. S. Douglas Abstract Objective: To provide shock (1C) as the goal of therapy;Denver Health Medical Center, an update to the ‘‘Surviving Sepsis reassessment of antimicrobial therapyDenver, CO, USA daily for de-escalation, when appro- Campaign Guidelines for Manage-R. Jaeschke ment of Severe Sepsis and Septic priate (1B); infection source controlMcMaster University, Shock,’’ last published in 2008. with attention to the balance of risksHamilton, ON, Canada Design: A consensus committee of and beneﬁts of the chosen method 68 international experts representing within 12 h of diagnosis (1C); initialT. M. Osborn 30 international organizations was ﬂuid resuscitation with crystalloidBarnes-Jewish Hospital, convened. Nominal groups were (1B) and consideration of the additionSt. Louis, MO, USA of albumin in patients who continue assembled at key international meet-M. E. Nunnally ings (for those committee members to require substantial amounts ofUniversity of Chicago Medical Center, attending the conference). A formal crystalloid to maintain adequate meanChicago, IL, USA conﬂict of interest policy was devel- arterial pressure (2C) and the avoid- oped at the onset of the process and ance of hetastarch formulations (1B);S. R. Townsend enforced throughout. The entire initial ﬂuid challenge in patients withCalifornia Paciﬁc Medical Center, guidelines process was conducted sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusionSan Francisco, CA, USA and suspicion of hypovolemia to independent of any industry funding.K. Reinhart A stand-alone meeting was held for achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg ofFriedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, all subgroup heads, co- and vice- crystalloids (more rapid administra-Germany chairs, and selected individuals. tion and greater amounts of ﬂuid may Teleconferences and electronic-based be needed in some patients (1C); ﬂuidR. M. Kleinpell discussion among subgroups and challenge technique continued as longRush University Medical Center, among the entire committee served as as hemodynamic improvement isChicago, IL, USA based on either dynamic or static an integral part of the development.D. C. Angus Methods: The authors were advised variables (UG); norepinephrine as theUniversity of Pittsburgh, to follow the principles of the Grad- ﬁrst-choice vasopressor to maintainPittsburgh, PA, USA ing of Recommendations Assessment, mean arterial pressure C65 mmHg Development and Evaluation (1B); epinephrine when an additionalC. S. Deutschman (GRADE) system to guide assessment agent is needed to maintain adequatePerelman School of Medicine at the of quality of evidence from high blood pressure (2B); vasopressinUniversity of Pennsylvania, (0.03 U/min) can be added to nor-Philadelphia, PA, USA (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as epinephrine to either raise meanF. R. Machado strong (1) or weak (2). The potential arterial pressure to target or toFederal University of Sao Paulo, drawbacks of making strong recom- decrease norepinephrine dose butSao Paulo, Brazil mendations in the presence of low- should not be used as the initial quality evidence were emphasized. vasopressor (UG); dopamine is notG. D. Rubenfeld Recommendations were classiﬁed recommended except in highlySunnybrook Health Sciences Center, selected circumstances (2C); dobuta-Toronto, ON, Canada into three groups: (1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; (2) those tar- mine infusion administered or addedS. Webb geting general care of the critically ill to vasopressor in the presence ofRoyal Perth Hospital, patient and considered high priority in (a) myocardial dysfunction as sug-Perth, Western Australia severe sepsis; and (3) pediatric con- gested by elevated cardiac ﬁlling siderations. Results: Key pressures and low cardiac output, orR. J. Beale recommendations and suggestions, (b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusionGuy’s and St. Thomas’ Hospital Trust, despite achieving adequate intravas-London, UK listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic cular volume and adequate meanJ.-L. Vincent patient during the ﬁrst 6 h after rec- arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use ofErasme University Hospital, ognition (1C); blood cultures before intravenous hydrocortisone in adultBrussels, Belgium antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging septic shock patients if adequate ﬂuid studies performed promptly to con- resuscitation and vasopressor therapyR. Moreno ﬁrm a potential source of infection are able to restore hemodynamic sta- ˜ ´UCINC, Hospital de Sao Jose, Centro (UG); administration of broad-spec- bility (2C); hemoglobin target ofHospitalar de Lisboa Central, E.P.E.,Lisbon, Portugal trum antimicrobials therapy within 7–9 g/dL in the absence of tissue 1 h of the recognition of septic shock hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary (1B) and severe sepsis without septic artery disease, or acute hemorrhage
167(1B); low tidal volume (1A) and blood glucose management com- bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (orlimitation of inspiratory plateau mencing insulin dosing when two albumin equivalent) over 5–10 minpressure (1B) for acute respiratory consecutive blood glucose levels are (2C); more common use of inotropesdistress syndrome (ARDS); applica- [180 mg/dL, targeting an upper and vasodilators for low cardiac out-tion of at least a minimal amount of blood glucose B180 mg/dL (1A); put septic shock associated withpositive end-expiratory pressure equivalency of continuous veno- elevated systemic vascular resistance(PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather venous hemoﬁltration or intermittent (2C); and use of hydrocortisone onlythan lower level of PEEP for patients hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for in children with suspected or provenwith sepsis-induced moderate or deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of ‘‘absolute’’’ adrenal insufﬁciencysevere ARDS (2C); recruitment stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent (2C). Conclusions: Strong agree-maneuvers in sepsis patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in ment existed among a large cohort ofsevere refractory hypoxemia due to patients with bleeding risk factors international experts regarding manyARDS (2C); prone positioning in (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) level 1 recommendations for the bestsepsis-induced ARDS patients with a feedings, as tolerated, rather than care of patients with severe sepsis.PaO2/FiO2 ratio of B100 mm Hg in either complete fasting or provision Although a signiﬁcant number offacilities that have experience with of only intravenous glucose within aspects of care have relatively weaksuch practices (2C); head-of-bed ele- the ﬁrst 48 h after a diagnosis of support, evidence-based recommen-vation in mechanically ventilated severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and dations regarding the acutepatients unless contraindicated (1B); addressing goals of care, including management of sepsis and septica conservative ﬂuid strategy for treatment plans and end-of-life plan- shock are the foundation of improvedpatients with established ARDS who ning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as outcomes for this important group ofdo not have evidence of tissue hypo- feasible, but within 72 h of intensive critically ill patients.perfusion (1C); protocols for weaning care unit admission (2C). Recom-and sedation (1A); minimizing use of mendations speciﬁc to pediatric Keywords Sepsis Á Severe sepsis Áeither intermittent bolus sedation or severe sepsis include: therapy with Septic shock Á Sepsis syndrome Ácontinuous infusion sedation target- face mask oxygen, high ﬂow nasal Infection Á Grading ofing speciﬁc titration endpoints (1B); cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal Recommendations Assessment,avoidance of neuromuscular blockers continuous PEEP in the presence of Development and Evaluation criteria Áif possible in the septic patient with- respiratory distress and hypoxemia GRADE Á Guidelines Áout ARDS (1C); a short course of (2C), use of physical examination Evidence-based medicine Áneuromuscular blocker (no longer therapeutic endpoints such as capil- Surviving Sepsis Campaign Áthan 48 h) for patients with early lary reﬁll (2C); for septic shock Sepsis bundlesARDS and a PaO2/FIO2 150 mm Hg associated with hypovolemia, the use(2C); a protocolized approach to of crystalloids or albumin to deliver aSepsis is a systemic, deleterious host response to infection making capability when he or she is presented with aleading to severe sepsis (acute organ dysfunction sec- patient’s unique set of clinical variables. Most of theseondary to documented or suspected infection) and septic recommendations are appropriate for the severe sepsisshock (severe sepsis plus hypotension not reversed with patient in the intensive care unit (ICU) and non-ICUﬂuid resuscitation). Severe sepsis and septic shock are settings. In fact, the committee believes that the greatestmajor healthcare problems, affecting millions of people outcome improvement can be made through educationaround the world each year, killing one in four (and often and process change for those caring for severe sepsismore), and increasing in incidence [1–5]. Similar to patients in the non-ICU setting and across the spectrum ofpolytrauma, acute myocardial infarction, or stroke, the acute care. Resource limitations in some institutions andspeed and appropriateness of therapy administered in the countries may prevent physicians from accomplishinginitial hours after severe sepsis develops are likely to particular recommendations. Thus, these recommenda-inﬂuence outcome. tions are intended to be best practice (the committee The recommendations in this document are intended to considers this a goal for clinical practice) and not createdprovide guidance for the clinician caring for a patient with to represent standard of care. The Surviving Sepsissevere sepsis or septic shock. Recommendations from Campaign (SSC) Guidelines Committee hopes that overthese guidelines cannot replace the clinician’s decision- time, particularly through education programs and formal
168audit and feedback performance improvement initiatives, to address content needs for the development process. Fourthe guidelines will inﬂuence bedside healthcare practi- clinicians with experience in the GRADE process applica-tioner behavior that will reduce the burden of sepsis tion (referred to in this document as GRADE group orworldwide. Evidence-Based Medicine [EBM] group) took part in the guidelines development. The guidelines development process began with appointment of group heads and assignment of committee members to groups according to their speciﬁc expertise.Methodology Each group was responsible for drafting the initial update toDeﬁnitions the 2008 edition in their assigned area (with major additional elements of information incorporated into the evolvingSepsis is deﬁned as the presence (probable or documented) manuscript through year-end 2011 and early 2012).of infection together with systemic manifestations of infec- With input from the EBM group, an initial group meet-tion. Severe sepsis is deﬁned as sepsis plus sepsis-induced ing was held to establish procedures for literature review andorgan dysfunction or tissue hypoperfusion (Tables 1, 2) . development of tables for evidence analysis. CommitteesThroughout this manuscript and the performance improve- and their subgroups continued work via phone and thement bundles, which are included, a distinction is made Internet. Several subsequent meetings of subgroups and keybetween deﬁnitions and therapeutic targets or thresholds. individuals occurred at major international meetingsSepsis-induced hypotension is deﬁned as a systolic blood (nominal groups), with work continuing via teleconferencespressure (SBP)90 mmHg or mean arterial pressure (MAP) and electronic-based discussions among subgroups and70 mmHg or a SBP decrease[40 mmHg or less than two members of the entire committee. Ultimately, a meeting ofstandard deviations below normal for age in the absence of all group heads, executive committee members, and otherother causes of hypotension. An example of a therapeutic key committee members was held to ﬁnalize the draft doc-target or typical threshold for the reversal of hypotension is ument for submission to reviewers.seen in the sepsis bundles for the use of vasopressors. In thebundles, the MAP threshold is C65 mmHg. The use of deﬁ-nition versus threshold will be evident throughout this article. Search techniquesSeptic shock is deﬁned as sepsis-induced hypotension per-sisting despite adequate ﬂuid resuscitation. Sepsis-induced A separate literature search was performed for each clearlytissue hypoperfusion is deﬁned as infection-induced hypo- deﬁned question. The committee chairs worked with sub-tension, elevated lactate, or oliguria. group heads to identify pertinent search terms that were to include, at a minimum, sepsis, severe sepsis, septic shock, and sepsis syndrome crossed against the subgroup’s generalHistory of the guidelines topic area, as well as appropriate key words of the speciﬁc question posed. All questions used in the previous guide-These clinical practice guidelines are a revision of the 2008 lines publications were searched, as were pertinent newSSC guidelines for the management of severe sepsis and questions generated by general topic-related searches orseptic shock . The initial SSC guidelines were published recent trials. The authors were speciﬁcally asked to look forin 2004  and incorporated the evidence available through existing meta-analyses related to their question and search athe end of 2003. The 2008 publication analyzed evidence minimum of one general database (i.e., MEDLINE, EM-available through the end of 2007. The most current iteration BASE) and the Cochrane Library [both The Cochraneis based on updated literature search incorporated into the Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and Database ofevolving manuscript through fall 2012. Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE)]. Other databases were optional (ACP Journal Club, Evidence- Based Medicine Journal, Cochrane Registry of ControlledSelection and organization of committee members Clinical Trials, International Standard Randomised Con- trolled Trial Registry (http://www.controlled-trials.com/The selection of committee members was based on interest isrctn/) or metaRegister of Controlled Trials (http://www.and expertise in speciﬁc aspects of sepsis. Co-chairs and controlled-trials.com/mrct/). Where appropriate, availableexecutive committee members were appointed by the evidence was summarized in the form of evidence tables.Society of Critical Care Medicine and European Society ofIntensive Care Medicine governing bodies. Each sponsor-ing organization appointed a representative who had sepsis Grading of recommendationsexpertise. Additional committee members were appointedby the co-chairs and executive committee to create conti- We advised the authors to follow the principles of thenuity with the previous committees’ membership as well as GRADE system to guide assessment of quality of
169Table 1 Diagnostic criteria for sepsisInfection, documented or suspected, and some of the following: General variables Fever ([38.3 °C) Hypothermia (core temperature 36 °C) Heart rate [90 min-1 or more than two SD above the normal value for age Tachypnea Altered mental status Signiﬁcant edema or positive ﬂuid balance ([ 20 mL/kg over 24 h) Hyperglycemia (plasma glucose [140 mg/dL or 7.7 mmol/L) in the absence of diabetes Inﬂammatory variables Leukocytosis (WBC count [12,000 lL-1) Leukopenia (WBC count 4,000 lL-1) Normal WBC count with greater than 10 % immature forms Plasma C-reactive protein more than two SD above the normal value Plasma procalcitonin more than two SD above the normal value Hemodynamic variables Arterial hypotension (SBP 90 mmHg, MAP 70 mmHg, or an SBP decrease [40 mmHg in adults or less than two SD below normal for age) Organ dysfunction variables Arterial hypoxemia (PaO2/FiO2 300) Acute oliguria (urine output 0.5 mL kg-1 h-1 for at least 2 h despite adequate ﬂuid resuscitation) Creatinine increase [0.5 mg/dL or 44.2 lmol/L Coagulation abnormalities (INR [1.5 or aPTT [60 s) Ileus (absent bowel sounds) Thrombocytopenia (platelet count 100,000 lL-1) Hyperbilirubinemia (plasma total bilirubin [4 mg/dL or 70 lmol/L) Tissue perfusion variables Hyperlactatemia ([1 mmol/L) Decreased capillary reﬁll or mottlingSD standard deviation, WBC white blood cell, SBP systolic blood hypothermia (rectal temperature [38.5 or 35 °C), tachycardiapressure, MAP mean arterial pressure, INR international normalized (may be absent in hypothermic patients), and at least one of theratio, aPTT activated partial thromboplastin time following indications of altered organ function: altered mental sta-Diagnostic criteria for sepsis in the pediatric population are signs tus, hypoxemia, increased serum lactate level, or bounding pulsesand symptoms of inﬂammation plus infection with hyper- or Adapted from Table 2 Severe sepsis The GRADE system is based on a sequential assess-Severe sepsis deﬁnition = sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion or ment of the quality of evidence, followed by assessment organ dysfunction (any of the following thought to be due to the of the balance between the beneﬁts and risks, burden, and infection) cost, leading to development and grading of a manage- Sepsis-induced hypotension ment recommendation. Keeping the rating of quality of Lactate above upper limits laboratory normal Urine output 0.5 mL kg-1 h-1 for more than 2 h despite evidence and strength of recommendation explicitly sep- adequate ﬂuid resuscitation arate constitutes a crucial and deﬁning feature of the Acute lung injury with PaO2/FiO2 250 in the absence of GRADE approach. This system classiﬁes quality of evi- pneumonia as infection source dence as high (grade A), moderate (grade B), low (grade Acute lung injury with PaO2/FiO2 200 in the presence of pneumonia as infection source C), or very low (grade D). Randomized trials begin as Creatinine [2.0 mg/dL (176.8 lmol/L) high-quality evidence but may be downgraded due to Bilirubin [2 mg/dL (34.2 lmol/L) limitations in implementation, inconsistency, or impreci- Platelet count 100,000 lL sion of the results, indirectness of the evidence, and Coagulopathy (international normalized ratio [1.5) possible reporting bias (Table 3). Examples of indirect-Adapted from  ness of the evidence include population studied, interventions used, outcomes measured, and how theseevidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the relate to the question of interest. Well-done observationalstrength of recommendations (Tables 3, 4) [9–11]. The SSC (nonrandomized) studies begin as low-quality evidence,Steering Committee and individual authors collaborated but the quality level may be upgraded on the basis of awith GRADE representatives to apply the system during the large magnitude of effect. An example of this is theSSC guidelines revision process. The members of the quality of evidence for early administration of antibiotics.GRADE group were directly involved, either in person or References to supplemental digital content appendices ofvia e-mail, in all discussions and deliberations among the GRADEpro Summary of Evidence Tables appear through-guidelines committee members as to grading decisions. out this document.
170Table 3 Determination of the quality of evidence Table 4 Factors determining strong versus weak recommendationUnderlying methodology What should be considered Recommended process A (high) RCTs High or moderate evidence (is The higher the quality of B (moderate) downgraded RCTs or upgraded observational studies there high or moderate quality C (low) well-done observational studies with control RCTs evidence, the more likely a evidence?) D (very low) downgraded controlled studies or expert opinion strong recommendation. based on other evidence Certainty about the balance of The larger the differenceFactors that may decrease the strength of evidence beneﬁts versus harms and between the desirable and burdens (is there certainty?) 1. Poor quality of planning and implementation of available RCTs, undesirable consequences and suggesting high likelihood of bias the certainty around that 2. Inconsistency of results, including problems with subgroup difference, the more likely a analyses strong recommendation. The 3. Indirectness of evidence (differing population, intervention, smaller the net beneﬁt and the control, outcomes, comparison) lower the certainty for that 4. Imprecision of results beneﬁt, the more likely a weak 5. High likelihood of reporting bias recommendation Certainty in or similar values (is The more certainty or similarityMain factors that may increase the strength of evidence there certainty or similarity?) 1. Large magnitude of effect (direct evidence, relative risk [ 2 in values and preferences, the with no plausible confounders) more likely a strong 2. Very large magnitude of effect with relative risk [ 5 and no recommendation threats to validity (by two levels) Resource implications (are The lower the cost of an 3. Dose–response gradient resources worth expected intervention compared to the beneﬁts?) alternative and other costsRCT randomized controlled trial related to the decision–i.e., fewer resources consumed— the more likely a strong The GRADE system classiﬁes recommendations as recommendationstrong (grade 1) or weak (grade 2). The factors inﬂuencingthis determination are presented in Table 4. The assignmentof strong or weak is considered of greater clinical impor- intervention and that most clinicians should use it in mosttance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. situations. Circumstances may exist in which a strongThe committee assessed whether the desirable effects of recommendation cannot or should not be followed for anadherence would outweigh the undesirable effects, and the individual because of that patient’s preferences or clinicalstrength of a recommendation reﬂects the group’s degree of characteristics that make the recommendation less appli-conﬁdence in that assessment. Thus, a strong recommen- cable. A strong recommendation does not automaticallydation in favor of an intervention reﬂects the panel’s opinion imply standard of care. For example, the strong recom-that the desirable effects of adherence to a recommendation mendation for administering antibiotics within 1 h of the(beneﬁcial health outcomes; lesser burden on staff and diagnosis of severe sepsis, as well as the recommendationpatients; and cost savings) will clearly outweigh the unde- for achieving a central venous pressure (CVP) ofsirable effects (harm to health; more burden on staff and 8 mmHg and a central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2)patients; and greater costs). The potential drawbacks of of 70 % in the ﬁrst 6 h of resuscitation of sepsis-inducedmaking strong recommendations in the presence of low- tissue hypoperfusion, although deemed desirable, are notquality evidence were taken into account. A weak recom- yet standards of care as veriﬁed by practice data.mendation in favor of an intervention indicates the judgment Signiﬁcant education of committee members on thethat the desirable effects of adherence to a recommendation GRADE approach built on the process conducted duringprobably will outweigh the undesirable effects, but the panel 2008 efforts. Several members of the committee wereis not conﬁdent about these tradeoffs—either because some trained in the use of GRADEpro software, allowing moreof the evidence is low quality (and thus uncertainty remains formal use of the GRADE system . Rules were dis-regarding the beneﬁts and risks) or the beneﬁts and down- tributed concerning assessing the body of evidence, andsides are closely balanced. A strong recommendation is GRADE representatives were available for adviceworded as ‘‘we recommend’’ and a weak recommendation throughout the process. Subgroups agreed electronicallyas ‘‘we suggest.’’ on draft proposals that were then presented for general Throughout the document are a number of statements discussion among subgroup heads, the SSC Steeringthat either follow graded recommendations or are listed as Committee (two co-chairs, two co-vice chairs, and an at-stand-alone numbered statements followed by ‘‘ungraded’’ large committee member), and several selected keyin parentheses (UG). In the opinion of the committee, committee members who met in July 2011 in Chicago.these recommendations were not conducive for the The results of that discussion were incorporated into theGRADE process. next version of recommendations and again discussed The implications of calling a recommendation strong with the whole group using electronic mail. Draft rec-are that most well-informed patients would accept that ommendations were distributed to the entire committee
171and ﬁnalized during an additional nominal group meeting Management of severe sepsisin Berlin in October 2011. Deliberations and decisionswere then recirculated to the entire committee for Initial resuscitation and infection issues (Table 5)approval. At the discretion of the chairs and following A. Initial resuscitationdiscussion, competing proposals for wording of recom- 1. We recommend the protocolized, quantitative resus-mendations or assigning strength of evidence were citation of patients with sepsis- induced tissueresolved by formal voting within subgroups and at nom- hypoperfusion (deﬁned in this document as hypoten-inal group meetings. The manuscript was edited for style sion persisting after initial ﬂuid challenge or bloodand form by the writing committee with ﬁnal approval by lactate concentration C4 mmol/L). This protocolsubgroup heads and then by the entire committee. To should be initiated as soon as hypoperfusion is rec-satisfy peer review during the ﬁnal stages of manuscript ognized and should not be delayed pending ICUapproval for publication, several recommendations were admission. During the ﬁrst 6 h of resuscitation, theedited with approval of the SSC executive committee goals of initial resuscitation of sepsis-induced hypo-group head for that recommendation and the EBM lead. perfusion should include all of the following as a part of a treatment protocol (grade 1C):Conﬂict of interest policy (a) CVP 8–12 mmHg (b) MAP C65 mmHgSince the inception of the SSC guidelines in 2004, no (c) Urine output C0.5 mL kg h-1members of the committee represented industry; there (d) Superior vena cava oxygenation saturation (ScvO2)was no industry input into guidelines development; and or mixed venous oxygen saturation (SvO2) 70 orno industry representatives were present at any of the 65 %, respectively.meetings. Industry awareness or comment on the recom- 2. We suggest targeting resuscitation to normalize lactatemendations was not allowed. No member of the in patients with elevated lactate levels as a marker ofguidelines committee received honoraria for any role in tissue hypoperfusion (grade 2C).the 2004, 2008, or 2012 guidelines process. A detailed description of the disclosure process and all Rationale. In a randomized, controlled, single-centerauthor disclosures appear in Supplemental Digital Content 1 study, early quantitative resuscitation improved survivalin the supplemental materials to this document. Appendix 2 for emergency department patients presenting with septicshows a ﬂowchart of the COI disclosure process. Committee shock . Resuscitation targeting the physiologic goalsmembers who were judged to have either ﬁnancial or non- expressed in recommendation 1 (above) for the initial 6-hﬁnancial/academic competing interests were recused during period was associated with a 15.9 % absolute reduction inthe closed discussion session and voting session on that 28-day mortality rate. This strategy, termed early goal-topic. Full disclosure and transparency of all committee directed therapy, was evaluated in a multicenter trial ofmembers’ potential conﬂicts were sought. 314 patients with severe sepsis in eight Chinese centers On initial review, 68 ﬁnancial conﬂict of interest . This trial reported a 17.7 % absolute reduction in(COI) disclosures and 54 non-ﬁnancial disclosures were 28-day mortality (survival rates, 75.2 vs. 57.5 %,submitted by committee members. Declared COI disclo- P = 0.001). A large number of other observational stud-sures from 19 members were determined by the COI ies using similar forms of early quantitative resuscitationsubcommittee to be not relevant to the guidelines content in comparable patient populations have shown signiﬁcantprocess. Nine who were determined to have COI (ﬁnan- mortality reduction compared to the institutions’ histori-cial and non-ﬁnancial) were adjudicated by group cal controls (Supplemental Digital Content 2). Phase IIIreassignment and requirement to adhere to SSC COI of the SSC activities, the international performancepolicy regarding discussion or voting at any committee improvement program, showed that the mortality of septicmeetings where content germane to their COI was dis- patients presenting with both hypotension and lactatecussed. Nine were judged as having conﬂicts that could C4 mmol/L was 46.1 %, similar to the 46.6 % mortalitynot be resolved solely by reassignment. One of these found in the ﬁrst trial cited above . As part of per-individuals was asked to step down from the committee. formance improvement programs, some hospitals haveThe other eight were assigned to the groups in which they lowered the lactate threshold for triggering quantitativehad the least COI. They were required to work within resuscitation in the patient with severe sepsis, but thesetheir group with full disclosure when a topic for which thresholds have not been subjected to randomized trials.they had relevant COI was discussed, and they were not The consensus panel judged use of CVP and SvO2 targetsallowed to serve as group head. At the time of ﬁnal to be recommended physiologic targets for resuscitation.approval of the document, an update of the COI statement Although there are limitations to CVP as a marker ofwas required. No additional COI issues were reported that intravascular volume status and response to ﬂuids, a lowrequired further adjudication. CVP generally can be relied upon as supporting positive
172Table 5 Recommendations: initial resuscitation and infection issuesA. Initial resuscitation 1. Protocolized, quantitative resuscitation of patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion (deﬁned in this document as hypotension persisting after initial ﬂuid challenge or blood lactate concentration C4 mmol/L). Goals during the ﬁrst 6 h of resuscitation: (a) Central venous pressure 8–12 mmHg (b) Mean arterial pressure (MAP) C 65 mmHg (c) Urine output C 0.5 mL kg-1 h (d) Central venous (superior vena cava) or mixed venous oxygen saturation 70 or 65 %, respectively (grade 1C) 2. In patients with elevated lactate levels targeting resuscitation to normalize lactate as rapidly as possible (grade 2C)B. Screening for sepsis and performance improvement 1. Routine screening of potentially infected seriously ill patients for severe sepsis to allow earlier implementation of therapy (grade 1C) 2. Hospital-based performance improvement efforts in severe sepsis (UG)C. Diagnosis 1. Cultures as clinically appropriate before antimicrobial therapy if no signiﬁcant delay ([45 min) in the start of antimicrobial(s) (grade 1C). At least 2 sets of blood cultures (both aerobic and anaerobic bottles) be obtained before antimicrobial therapy with at least 1 drawn percutaneously and 1 drawn through each vascular access device, unless the device was recently (48 h) inserted (grade 1C) 2. Use of the 1,3 b-D-glucan assay (grade 2B), mannan and anti-mannan antibody assays (2C), if available and invasive candidiasis is in differential diagnosis of cause of infection. 3. Imaging studies performed promptly to conﬁrm a potential source of infection (UG)D. Antimicrobial therapy 1. Administration of effective intravenous antimicrobials within the ﬁrst hour of recognition of septic shock (grade 1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (grade 1C) as the goal of therapy 2a. Initial empiric anti-infective therapy of one or more drugs that have activity against all likely pathogens (bacterial and/or fungal or viral) and that penetrate in adequate concentrations into tissues presumed to be the source of sepsis (grade 1B) 2b. Antimicrobial regimen should be reassessed daily for potential deescalation (grade 1B) 3. Use of low procalcitonin levels or similar biomarkers to assist the clinician in the discontinuation of empiric antibiotics in patients who initially appeared septic, but have no subsequent evidence of infection (grade 2C) 4a. Combination empirical therapy for neutropenic patients with severe sepsis (grade 2B) and for patients with difﬁcult to treat, multidrug-resistant bacterial pathogens such as Acinetobacter and Pseudomonas spp. (grade 2B). For patients with severe infections associated with respiratory failure and septic shock, combination therapy with an extended spectrum beta-lactam and either an aminoglycoside or a ﬂuoroquinolone is for P. aeruginosa bacteremia (grade 2B). A combination of beta-lactam and macrolide for patients with septic shock from bacteremic Streptococcus pneumoniae infections (grade 2B) 4b. Empiric combination therapy should not be administered for more than 3–5 days. De-escalation to the most appropriate single therapy should be performed as soon as the susceptibility proﬁle is known (grade 2B) 5. Duration of therapy typically 7–10 days; longer courses may be appropriate in patients who have a slow clinical response, undrainable foci of infection, bacteremia with S. aureus; some fungal and viral infections or immunologic deﬁciencies, including neutropenia (grade 2C) 6. Antiviral therapy initiated as early as possible in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock of viral origin (grade 2C) 7. Antimicrobial agents should not be used in patients with severe inﬂammatory states determined to be of noninfectious cause (UG)E. Source control 1. A speciﬁc anatomical diagnosis of infection requiring consideration for emergent source control be sought and diagnosed or excluded as rapidly as possible, and intervention be undertaken for source control within the ﬁrst 12 h after the diagnosis is made, if feasible (grade 1C) 2. When infected peripancreatic necrosis is identiﬁed as a potential source of infection, deﬁnitive intervention is best delayed until adequate demarcation of viable and nonviable tissues has occurred (grade 2B) 3. When source control in a severely septic patient is required, the effective intervention associated with the least physiologic insult should be used (e.g., percutaneous rather than surgical drainage of an abscess) (UG) 4. If intravascular access devices are a possible source of severe sepsis or septic shock, they should be removed promptly after other vascular access has been established (UG)F. Infection prevention 1a. Selective oral decontamination and selective digestive decontamination should be introduced and investigated as a method to reduce the incidence of ventilator-associated pneumonia; This infection control measure can then be instituted in health care settings and regions where this methodology is found to be effective (grade 2B) 1b. Oral chlorhexidine gluconate be used as a form of oropharyngeal decontamination to reduce the risk of ventilator-associated pneumonia in ICU patients with severe sepsis (grade 2B)response to ﬂuid loading. Either intermittent or continuous achieve the ScvO2 or SvO2 goal are options. The strongmeasurements of oxygen saturation were judged to be recommendation for achieving a CVP of 8 mmHg and anacceptable. During the ﬁrst 6 h of resuscitation, if ScvO2 less ScvO2 of 70 % in the ﬁrst 6 h of resuscitation of sepsis-than 70 % or SvO2 equivalent of less than 65 % persists with induced tissue hypoperfusion, although deemed desirable,what is judged to be adequate intravascular volume reple- are not yet the standard of care as veriﬁed by practice data.tion in the presence of persisting tissue hypoperfusion, then The publication of the initial results of the international SSCdobutamine infusion (to a maximum of 20 lg kg-1 min-1) performance improvement program demonstrated thator transfusion of packed red blood cells to achieve a adherence to CVP and ScvO2 targets for initial resuscitationhematocrit of greater than or equal to 30 % in attempts to was low .
173 In mechanically ventilated patients or those with known (n = 30). The second trial included 348 patients with lactatepreexisting decreased ventricular compliance, a higher target levels C3 mmol/L . The strategy in this trial was basedCVP of 12–15 mmHg should be achieved to account for the on a greater than or equal to 20 % decrease in lactate levelsimpediment in ﬁlling . Similar consideration may be per 2 h of the ﬁrst 8 h in addition to ScvO2 target achieve-warranted in circumstances of increased abdominal pressure ment, and was associated with a 9.6 % absolute reduction in. Elevated CVP may also be seen with preexisting clin- mortality (P = 0.067; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.61; 95 % CI,ically signiﬁcant pulmonary artery hypertension, making use 0.43–0.87; P = 0.006).of this variable untenable for judging intravascular volumestatus. Although the cause of tachycardia in septic patientsmay be multifactorial, a decrease in elevated pulse rate with B. Screening for sepsis and performance improvementﬂuid resuscitation is often a useful marker of improving 1. We recommend routine screening of potentiallyintravascular ﬁlling. Published observational studies have infected seriously ill patients for severe sepsis todemonstrated an association between good clinical outcome increase the early identiﬁcation of sepsis and allowin septic shock and MAP C65 mmHg as well as ScvO2 implementation of early sepsis therapy (grade 1C).C70 % (measured in the superior vena cava, either inter-mittently or continuously) . Many studies support the Rationale. The early identiﬁcation of sepsis and imple-value of early protocolized resuscitation in severe sepsis and mentation of early evidence-based therapies have beensepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion [19–24]. Studies of documented to improve outcomes and decrease sepsis-patients with shock indicate that SvO2 runs 5–7 % lower than related mortality . Reducing the time to diagnosis ofScvO2 . While the committee recognized the controversy severe sepsis is thought to be a critical component ofsurrounding resuscitation targets, an early quantitative reducing mortality from sepsis-related multiple organresuscitation protocol using CVP and venous blood gases dysfunction . Lack of early recognition is a majorcan be readily established in both emergency department and obstacle to sepsis bundle initiation. Sepsis screening toolsICU settings . Recognized limitations to static ventric- have been developed to monitor ICU patients [37–41],ular ﬁlling pressure estimates exist as surrogates for ﬂuid and their implementation has been associated withresuscitation [27, 28], but measurement of CVP is currently decreased sepsis-related mortality .the most readily obtainable target for ﬂuid resuscitation.Targeting dynamic measures of ﬂuid responsiveness during 2. Performance improvement efforts in severe sepsisresuscitation, including ﬂow and possibly volumetric indices should be used to improve patient outcomes (UG).and microcirculatory changes, may have advantages [29–32]. Available technologies allow measurement of ﬂow at Rationale. Performance improvement efforts in sepsisthe bedside [33, 34]; however, the efﬁcacy of these moni- have been associated with improved patient outcomes [19,toring techniques to inﬂuence clinical outcomes from early 42–46]. Improvement in care through increasing compli-sepsis resuscitation remains incomplete and requires further ance with sepsis quality indicators is the goal of a severestudy before endorsement. sepsis performance improvement program . Sepsis The global prevalence of severe sepsis patients initially management requires a multidisciplinary team (physicians,presenting with either hypotension with lactate C4 mmol/L, nurses, pharmacy, respiratory, dieticians, and administra-hypotension alone, or lactate C4 mmol/L alone, is reported tion) and multispecialty collaboration (medicine, surgery,as 16.6, 49.5, and 5.4 %, respectively . The mortality and emergency medicine) to maximize the chance for suc-rate is high in septic patients with both hypotension and cess. Evaluation of process change requires consistentlactate C4 mmol/L (46.1 %) , and is also increased in education, protocol development and implementation, dataseverely septic patients with hypotension alone (36.7 %) collection, measurement of indicators, and feedback toand lactate C4 mmol/L alone (30 %) . If ScvO2 is not facilitate the continuous performance improvement.available, lactate normalization may be a feasible option in Ongoing educational sessions provide feedback on indi-the patient with severe sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion. cator compliance and can help identify areas forScvO2 and lactate normalization may also be used as a additional improvement efforts. In addition to traditionalcombined endpoint when both are available. Two multi- continuing medical education efforts to introduce guide-center randomized trials evaluated a resuscitation strategy lines into clinical practice, knowledge translation effortsthat included lactate reduction as a single target or a target have recently been introduced as a means to promote thecombined with ScvO2 normalization [35, 36]. The ﬁrst trial use of high-quality evidence in changing behavior .reported that early quantitative resuscitation based on lactate Protocol implementation associated with education andclearance (decrease by at least 10 %) was noninferior to performance feedback has been shown to change clini-early quantitative resuscitation based on achieving ScvO2 of cian behavior and is associated with improved outcomes70 % or more . The intention-to-treat group contained and cost effectiveness in severe sepsis [19, 23, 24, 49]. In300, but the number of patients actually requiring either partnership with the Institute for Healthcare Improve-ScvO2 normalization or lactate clearance was small ment, phase III of the SSC targeted the implementation of
174a core set (‘‘bundle’’) of recommendations in hospital devices with signs of inﬂammation, catheter dysfunction, orenvironments where change in behavior and clinical indicators of thrombus formation). Obtaining blood culturesimpact were measured . The SSC guidelines and peripherally and through a vascular access device is anbundles can be used as the basis of a sepsis performance important strategy. If the same organism is recovered fromimprovement program. both cultures, the likelihood that the organism is causing the Application of the SSC sepsis bundles led to sustained, severe sepsis is enhanced.continuous quality improvement in sepsis care and was In addition, if equivalent volumes of blood drawn forassociated with reduced mortality . Analysis of the data culture and the vascular access device is positive muchfrom nearly 32,000 patient charts gathered from 239 hospi- earlier than the peripheral blood culture (i.e., more than 2 htals in 17 countries through September 2011 as part of phase earlier), the data support the concept that the vascular accessIII of the campaign informed the revision of the bundles in device is the source of the infection [36, 51, 52]. Quantitativeconjunction with the 2012 guidelines. As a result, for the cultures of catheter and peripheral blood may also be useful2012 version, the management bundle was dropped and the for determining whether the catheter is the source of infec-resuscitation bundle was broken into two parts and modiﬁed tion. The volume of blood drawn with the culture tube shouldas shown in Fig. 1. For performance improvement quality be C10 mL . Quantitative (or semiquantitative) culturesindicators, resuscitation target thresholds are not considered. of respiratory tract secretions are often recommended for theHowever, recommended targets from the guidelines are diagnosis of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) ,included with the bundles for reference purposes. but their diagnostic value remains unclear . The Gram stain can be useful, in particular for respira- tory tract specimens, to determine if inﬂammatory cells areC. Diagnosis present (greater than ﬁve polymorphonuclear leukocytes/1. We recommend obtaining appropriate cultures before high-powered ﬁeld and less than 10 squamous cells/low- antimicrobial therapy is initiated if such cultures do powered ﬁeld) and if culture results will be informative of not cause signiﬁcant delay ([45 min) in the start of lower respiratory pathogens. Rapid inﬂuenza antigen testing antimicrobial(s) administration (grade 1C). To opti- during periods of increased inﬂuenza activity in the com- mize identiﬁcation of causative organisms, we munity is also recommended. A focused history can provide recommend obtaining at least two sets of blood cul- vital information about potential risk factors for infection tures (both aerobic and anaerobic bottles) before and likely pathogens at speciﬁc tissue sites. The potential antimicrobial therapy, with at least one drawn percu- role of biomarkers for diagnosis of infection in patients taneously and one drawn through each vascular access presenting with severe sepsis remains undeﬁned. The utility device, unless the device was recently (48 h) inser- of procalcitonin levels or other biomarkers (such as ted. These blood cultures can be drawn at the same C-reactive protein) to discriminate the acute inﬂammatory time if they are obtained from different sites. Cultures pattern of sepsis from other causes of generalized inﬂam- of other sites (preferably quantitative where appropri- mation (e.g., postoperative, other forms of shock) has not ate), such as urine, cerebrospinal ﬂuid, wounds, been demonstrated. No recommendation can be given for respiratory secretions, or other body ﬂuids that may be the use of these markers to distinguish between severe the source of infection, should also be obtained before infection and other acute inﬂammatory states [56–58]. antimicrobial therapy if doing so does not cause sig- In the near future, rapid, non-culture-based diagnostic niﬁcant delay in antibiotic administration (grade 1C). methods (polymerase chain reaction, mass spectroscopy, microarrays) might be helpful for a quicker identiﬁcation ofRationale. Although sampling should not delay timely pathogens and major antimicrobial resistance determinantsadministration of antimicrobial agents in patients with . These methodologies could be particularly useful forsevere sepsis (e.g., lumbar puncture in suspected meningi- difﬁcult-to-culture pathogens or in clinical situations wheretis), obtaining appropriate cultures before administration of empiric antimicrobial agents have been administered beforeantimicrobials is essential to conﬁrm infection and the culture samples were been obtained. Clinical experienceresponsible pathogens, and to allow de-escalation of anti- remains limited, and more clinical studies are needed beforemicrobial therapy after receipt of the susceptibility proﬁle. recommending these non-culture molecular methods as aSamples can be refrigerated or frozen if processing cannot replacement for standard blood culture methods [60, 61].be performed immediately. Because rapid sterilization ofblood cultures can occur within a few hours after the ﬁrst 2. We suggest the use of the 1,3 b-D-glucan assay (gradeantimicrobial dose, obtaining those cultures before therapy 2B), mannan and anti-mannan antibody assays (gradeis essential if the causative organism is to be identiﬁed. Two 2C), when invasive candidiasis is in the differentialor more blood cultures are recommended . In patients diagnosis of infection.with indwelling catheters (for more than 48 h), at least oneblood culture should be drawn through each lumen of each Rationale. The diagnosis of systemic fungal infectionvascular access device (if feasible, especially for vascular (usually candidiasis) in the critically ill patient can be
175Fig. 1 Surviving sepsiscampaign care bundles SURVIVING SEPSIS CAMPAIGN CARE BUNDLES TO BE COMPLETED WITHIN 3 HOURS: 1) Measure lactate level 2) Obtain blood cultures prior to administration of antibiotics 3) Administer broad spectrum antibiotics 4) Administer 30 mL/kg crystalloid for hypotension or lactate ≥ 4 mmol/L TO BE COMPLETED WITHIN 6 HOURS: 5) Apply vasopressors (for hypotension that does not respond to initial fluid resuscitation) to maintain a mean arterial pressure (MAP) ≥ 65 mm Hg 6) In the event of persistent arterial hypotension despite volume resuscitation (septic shock) or initial lactate ≥ 4 mmol/L (36 mg/dL): - Measure central venous pressure (CVP)* - Measure central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2)* 7) Remeasure lactate if initial lactate was elevated* *Targets for quantitative resuscitation included in the guidelines are CVP of ≥8 mm Hg, ScvO2 of ≥ 70%, and normalization of lactate.challenging, and rapid diagnostic methodologies, such as shock (grade 1C) should be the goal of therapy.antigen and antibody detection assays, can be helpful in Remark: Although the weight of the evidence supportsdetecting candidiasis in the ICU patient. These suggested prompt administration of antibiotics following thetests have shown positive results signiﬁcantly earlier than recognition of severe sepsis and septic shock, thestandard culture methods [62–67], but false-positive feasibility with which clinicians may achieve this idealreactions can occur with colonization alone, and their state has not been scientiﬁcally evaluated.diagnostic utility in managing fungal infection in the ICUneeds additional study . Rationale. Establishing vascular access and initiating aggressive ﬂuid resuscitation are the ﬁrst priorities when3. We recommend that imaging studies be performed managing patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. promptly in attempts to conﬁrm a potential source of Prompt infusion of antimicrobial agents should also be a infection. Potential sources of infection should be sam- priority and may require additional vascular access ports pled as they are identiﬁed and in consideration of patient [68, 69]. In the presence of septic shock, each hour delay risk for transport and invasive procedures (e.g., careful in achieving administration of effective antibiotics is coordination and aggressive monitoring if the decision is associated with a measurable increase in mortality in a made to transport for a computed tomography-guided number of studies [15, 68, 70–72]. Overall, the prepon- needle aspiration). Bedside studies, such as ultrasound, derance of data support giving antibiotics as soon as may avoid patient transport (UG). possible in patients with severe sepsis with or without septic shock [15, 68, 70–77]. The administration of anti-Rationale. Diagnostic studies may identify a source of microbial agents with a spectrum of activity likely to treatinfection that requires removal of a foreign body or drainage the responsible pathogen(s) effectively within 1 h of theto maximize the likelihood of a satisfactory response to diagnosis of severe sepsis and septic shock. Practicaltherapy. Even in the most organized and well-staffed considerations, for example challenges with clinicians’healthcare facilities, however, transport of patients can be early identiﬁcation of patients or operational complexitiesdangerous, as can be placing patients in outside-unit imaging in the drug delivery chain, represent unstudied variablesdevices that are difﬁcult to access and monitor. Balancing that may impact achieving this goal. Future trials shouldrisk and beneﬁt is therefore mandatory in those settings. endeavor to provide an evidence base in this regard. This should be the target goal when managing patients withD. Antimicrobial therapy septic shock, whether they are located within the hospital1. The administration of effective intravenous antimi- ward, the emergency department, or the ICU. The strong crobials within the ﬁrst hour of recognition of septic recommendation for administering antibiotics within 1 h shock (grade 1B) and severe sepsis without septic of the diagnosis of severe sepsis and septic shock,
176although judged to be desirable, is not yet the standard of agents, or if Candida glabrata infection is suspected fromcare as veriﬁed by published practice data . earlier culture data. Knowledge of local resistance pat- If antimicrobial agents cannot be mixed and delivered terns to antifungal agents should guide drug selectionpromptly from the pharmacy, establishing a supply of until fungal susceptibility test results, if available, arepremixed antibiotics for such urgent situations is an performed. Risk factors for candidemia, such as immu-appropriate strategy for ensuring prompt administration. nosuppressed or neutropenic state, prior intense antibioticMany antibiotics will not remain stable if premixed in a therapy, or colonization in multiple sites, should also besolution. This risk must be taken into consideration in considered when choosing initial therapy.institutions that rely on premixed solutions for rapid Because patients with severe sepsis or septic shock haveavailability of antibiotics. In choosing the antimicrobial little margin for error in the choice of therapy, the initialregimen, clinicians should be aware that some antimi- selection of antimicrobial therapy should be broad enoughcrobial agents have the advantage of bolus administration, to cover all likely pathogens. Antibiotic choices should bewhile others require a lengthy infusion. Thus, if vascular guided by local prevalence patterns of bacterial pathogensaccess is limited and many different agents must be and susceptibility data. Ample evidence exists that failure toinfused, bolus drugs may offer an advantage. initiate appropriate therapy (i.e., therapy with activity2a. We recommend that initial empiric anti-infective ther- against the pathogen that is subsequently identiﬁed as the apy include one or more drugs that have activity against causative agent) correlates with increased morbidity and all likely pathogens (bacterial and/or fungal or viral) mortality in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock [68, and that penetrate in adequate concentrations into the 71, 79, 80]. Recent exposure to antimicrobials (within last tissues presumed to be the source of sepsis (grade 1B). 3 months) should be considered in the choice of an empiric antibacterial regimen. Patients with severe sepsis or septicRationale. The choice of empirical antimicrobial therapy shock warrant broad-spectrum therapy until the causativedepends on complex issues related to the patient’s history, organism and its antimicrobial susceptibilities are deﬁned.including drug intolerances, recent receipt of antibiotics Although a global restriction of antibiotics is an important(previous 3 months), underlying disease, the clinical syn- strategy to reduce the development of antimicrobial resis-drome, and susceptibility patterns of pathogens in the tance and to reduce cost, it is not an appropriate strategy incommunity and hospital, and that previously have been the initial therapy for this patient population. However, asdocumented to colonize or infect the patient. The most soon as the causative pathogen has been identiﬁed, de-common pathogens that cause septic shock in hospitalized escalation should be performed by selecting the mostpatients are Gram-positive bacteria, followed by Gram- appropriate antimicrobial agent that covers the pathogennegative and mixed bacterial microorganisms. Candidiasis, and is safe and cost-effective. Collaboration with antimi-toxic shock syndromes, and an array of uncommon patho- crobial stewardship programs, where they exist, isgens should be considered in selected patients. An especially encouraged to ensure appropriate choices and rapid avail-wide range of potential pathogens exists for neutropenic ability of effective antimicrobials for treating septicpatients. Recently used anti-infective agents should gener- patients. All patients should receive a full loading dose ofally be avoided. When choosing empirical therapy, each agent. Patients with sepsis often have abnormal andclinicians should be cognizant of the virulence and growing vacillating renal or hepatic function, or may have abnor-prevalence of oxacillin (methicillin)-resistant Staphylococ- mally high volumes of distribution due to aggressive ﬂuidcus aureus, and resistance to broad-spectrum beta-lactams resuscitation, requiring dose adjustment. Drug serum con-and carbapenem among Gram-negative bacilli in some centration monitoring can be useful in an ICU setting forcommunities and healthcare settings. Within regions in those drugs that can be measured promptly. Signiﬁcantwhich the prevalence of such drug-resistant organisms is expertise is required to ensure that serum concentrationssigniﬁcant, empiric therapy adequate to cover these patho- maximize efﬁcacy and minimize toxicity [81, 82].gens is warranted. Clinicians should also consider whether candidemia is 2b. The antimicrobial regimen should be reassessed dailya likely pathogen when choosing initial therapy. When for potential de-escalation to prevent the develop-deemed warranted, the selection of empirical antifungal ment of resistance, to reduce toxicity, and to reducetherapy (e.g., an echinocandin, triazoles such as ﬂuco- costs (grade 1B).nazole, or a formulation of amphotericin B) should betailored to the local pattern of the most prevalent Candida Rationale. Once the causative pathogen has been iden-species and any recent exposure to antifungal drugs . tiﬁed, the most appropriate antimicrobial agent thatRecent Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) covers the pathogen and is safe and cost-effective shouldguidelines recommend either ﬂuconazole or an echino- be selected. On occasion, continued use of speciﬁccandin. Empiric use of an echinocandin is preferred in combinations of antimicrobials might be indicated evenmost patients with severe illness, especially in those after susceptibility testing is available (e.g., Pseudomonaspatients who have recently been treated with antifungal spp. only susceptible to aminoglycosides; enterococcal
177endocarditis; Acinetobacter spp. infections susceptible only 4b. We suggest that combination therapy, when usedto polymyxins). Decisions on deﬁnitive antibiotic choices empirically in patients with severe sepsis, should notshould be based on the type of pathogen, patient charac- be administered for longer than 3–5 days. De-esca-teristics, and favored hospital treatment regimens. lation to the most appropriate single-agent therapy Narrowing the spectrum of antimicrobial coverage and should be performed as soon as the susceptibilityreducing the duration of antimicrobial therapy will reduce proﬁle is known (grade 2B). Exceptions wouldthe likelihood that the patient will develop superinfection include aminoglycoside monotherapy, which shouldwith other pathogenic or resistant organisms, such as be generally avoided, particularly for P. aeruginosaCandida species, Clostridium difﬁcile, or vancomycin- sepsis, and for selected forms of endocarditis, whereresistant Enterococcus faecium. However, the desire to prolonged courses of combinations of antibiotics areminimize superinfections and other complications should warranted.not take precedence over giving an adequate course oftherapy to cure the infection that caused the severe sepsis Rationale. A propensity-matched analysis, meta-analy-or septic shock. sis, and meta-regression analysis, along with additional observational studies, have demonstrated that combina-3. We suggest the use of low procalcitonin levels or tion therapy produces a superior clinical outcome in similar biomarkers to assist the clinician in the dis- severely ill, septic patients with a high risk of death [86– continuation of empiric antibiotics in patients who 90]. In light of the increasing frequency of resistance to appeared septic, but have no subsequent evidence of antimicrobial agents in many parts of the world, broad- infection (grade 2C). spectrum coverage generally requires the initial use ofRationale. This suggestion is predicated on the prepon- combinations of antimicrobial agents. Combination ther-derance of the published literature relating to the use of apy used in this context connotes at least two differentprocalcitonin as a tool to discontinue unnecessary antimi- classes of antibiotics (usually a beta-lactam agent with acrobials [58, 83]. However, clinical experience with this macrolide, ﬂuoroquinolone, or aminoglycoside for selectstrategy is limited and the potential for harm remains a patients). A controlled trial suggested, however, thatconcern . No evidence demonstrates that this practice when using a carbapenem as empiric therapy in a popu-reduces the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance or the risk lation at low risk for infection with resistantof antibiotic-related diarrhea from C. difﬁcile. One recent microorganisms, the addition of a ﬂuoroquinolone doesstudy failed to show any beneﬁt of daily procalcitonin not improve outcomes of patients . A number of othermeasurement in early antibiotic therapy or survival . recent observational studies and some small, prospective trials support initial combination therapy for selected4a. Empiric therapy should attempt to provide antimi- patients with speciﬁc pathogens (e.g., pneumococcal crobial activity against the most likely pathogens sepsis, multidrug-resistant Gram-negative pathogens) based upon each patient’s presenting illness and local [91–93], but evidence from adequately powered, ran- patterns of infection. We suggest combination empiric domized clinical trials is not available to support therapy for neutropenic patients with severe sepsis combination over monotherapy other than in septic (grade 2B) and for patients with difﬁcult-to- treat, patients at high risk of death. In some clinical scenarios, multidrug-resistant bacterial pathogens such as Acine- combination therapies are biologically plausible and are tobacter and Pseudomonas spp. (grade 2B). For likely clinically useful even if evidence has not demon- selected patients with severe infections associated with strated improved clinical outcome [89, 90, 94, 95]. respiratory failure and septic shock, combination ther- Combination therapy for suspected or known Pseudo- apy with an extended spectrum beta-lactam and either monas aeruginosa or other multiresistant Gram-negative an aminoglycoside or a ﬂuoroquinolone is suggested for pathogens, pending susceptibility results, increases the P. aeruginosa bacteremia (grade 2B). Similarly, a more likelihood that at least 1 drug is effective against that complex combination of beta-lactam and a macrolide is strain and positively affects outcome [88, 96]. suggested for patients with septic shock from bactere- mic Streptococcus pneumoniae infections (grade 2B). 5. We suggest that the duration of therapy typically be 7–10 days if clinically indicated; longer courses mayRationale. Complex combinations might be needed in be appropriate in patients who have a slow clinicalsettings where highly antibiotic-resistant pathogens are response, undrainable foci of infection, bacteremia withprevalent, with such regimens incorporating carbapen- S. aureus; some fungal and viral infections, or immu-ems, colistin, rifampin, or other agents. However, a recent nologic deﬁciencies, including neutropenia (grade 2C).controlled trial suggested that adding a ﬂuoroquinolone toa carbapenem as empiric therapy did not improve out- Rationale. Although patient factors may inﬂuence thecome in a population at low risk for infection with length of antibiotic therapy, in general, a duration of 7–10resistant microorganisms . days (in the absence of source control issues) is adequate.
178Thus, decisions to continue, narrow, or stop antimicrobial infected with an antimicrobial-resistant pathogen or willtherapy must be made on the basis of clinician judgment develop a drug-related adverse effect. Although it isand clinical information. Clinicians should be cognizant important to stop unnecessary antibiotics early, cliniciansof blood cultures being negative in a signiﬁcant percent- should be cognizant that blood cultures will be negative inage of cases of severe sepsis or septic shock, despite the more than 50 % of cases of severe sepsis or septic shockfact that many of these cases are very likely caused by if the patients are receiving empiric antimicrobial therapy;bacteria or fungi. Clinicians should be cognizant that yet many of these cases are very likely caused by bacteriablood cultures will be negative in a signiﬁcant percentage or fungi. Thus, the decisions to continue, narrow, or stopof cases of severe sepsis or septic shock, despite many of antimicrobial therapy must be made on the basis of cli-these cases are very likely caused by bacteria or fungi. nician judgment and clinical information.6. We suggest that antiviral therapy be initiated as early as possible in patients with severe sepsis or septic E. Source control shock of viral origin (grade 2C). 1. We recommend that a speciﬁc anatomical diagnosis ofRationale. Recommendations for antiviral treatment infection requiring consideration for emergent sourceinclude the use of: a) early antiviral treatment of sus- control (e.g., necrotizing soft tissue infection, peritonitis,pected or conﬁrmed inﬂuenza among persons with severe cholangitis, intestinal infarction) be sought and diagnosedinﬂuenza (e.g., those who have severe, complicated, or or excluded as rapidly as possible, and intervention beprogressive illness or who require hospitalization); b) undertaken for source control within the ﬁrst 12 h afterearly antiviral treatment of suspected or conﬁrmed inﬂu- the diagnosis is made, if feasible (grade 1C).enza among persons at higher risk for inﬂuenza 2. We suggest that when infected peripancreatic necrosis iscomplications; and c) therapy with a neuraminidase identiﬁed as a potential source of infection, deﬁnitiveinhibitor (oseltamivir or zanamivir) for persons with intervention is best delayed until adequate demarcationinﬂuenza caused by 2009 H1N1 virus, inﬂuenza A of viable and nonviable tissues has occurred (grade 2B).(H3N2) virus, or inﬂuenza B virus, or when the inﬂuenza 3. When source control in a severely septic patient isvirus type or inﬂuenza A virus subtype is unknown [97, required, the effective intervention associated with the98]. Susceptibility to antivirals is highly variable in a least physiologic insult should be used (e.g., percutane-rapidly evolving virus such as inﬂuenza, and therapeutic ous rather than surgical drainage of an abscess) (UG).decisions must be guided by updated information 4. If intravascular access devices are a possible source ofregarding the most active, strain-speciﬁc, antiviral agents severe sepsis or septic shock, they should be removedduring inﬂuenza epidemics [99, 100]. promptly after other vascular access has been estab- The role of cytomegalovirus (CMV) and other her- lished (UG).pesviruses as signiﬁcant pathogens in septic patients,especially those not known to be severely immunocom- Rationale. The principles of source control in thepromised, remains unclear. Active CMV viremia is management of sepsis include a rapid diagnosis of thecommon (15–35 %) in critically ill patients; the presence speciﬁc site of infection and identiﬁcation of a focus ofof CMV in the bloodstream has been repeatedly found to infection amenable to source control measures (speciﬁ-be a poor prognostic indicator [101, 102]. What is not cally the drainage of an abscess, debridement of infectedknown is whether CMV simply is a marker of disease necrotic tissue, removal of a potentially infected device,severity or if the virus actually contributes to organ injury and deﬁnitive control of a source of ongoing microbialand death in septic patients . No treatment recom- contamination) . Foci of infection readily amenablemendations can be given based on the current level of to source control measures include an intra-abdominalevidence. In those patients with severe primary or gen- abscess or gastrointestinal perforation, cholangitis oreralized varicella-zoster virus infections, and in rare pyelonephritis, intestinal ischemia or necrotizing softpatients with disseminated herpes simplex infections, tissue infection, and other deep space infection, such as anantiviral agents such as acyclovir can be highly effective empyema or septic arthritis. Such infectious foci shouldwhen initiated early in the course of infection . be controlled as soon as possible following successful initial resuscitation [106–108], and intravascular access7. We recommend that antimicrobial agents not be used devices that are potentially the source of severe sepsis or in patients with severe inﬂammatory states determined septic shock should be removed promptly after estab- to be of noninfectious cause (UG). lishing other sites for vascular access [109, 110]. An RCT comparing early to delayed surgical inter-Rationale. When infection is found not to be present, vention for peripancreatic necrosis showed betterantimicrobial therapy should be stopped promptly to outcomes with a delayed approach . Moreover, aminimize the likelihood that the patient will become randomized surgical study found that a minimally
179invasive, step-up approach was better tolerated by debate, despite the recent evidence that the incidence ofpatients and had a lower mortality than open necrosec- antimicrobial resistance does not change appreciably withtomy in necrotizing pancreatitis , although areas of current SDD regimens [119–121]. The grade 2B wasuncertainty exist, such as deﬁnitive documentation of designated for both SOD and CHG as it was felt that riskinfection and appropriate length of delay. The selection of was lower with CHG and the measure better acceptedoptimal source control methods must weigh the beneﬁts despite less published literature than with SOD.and risks of the speciﬁc intervention as well as risks of Supplemental Digital Content 3 shows a GRADEprotransfer . Source control interventions may cause Summary of Evidence Table for the use of topicalfurther complications, such as bleeding, ﬁstulas, or inad- digestive tract antibiotics and CHG for prophylaxisvertent organ injury. Surgical intervention should be against VAP.considered when other interventional approaches areinadequate or when diagnostic uncertainty persists despiteradiologic evaluation. Speciﬁc clinical situations require Hemodynamic support and adjunctive therapyconsideration of available choices, the patient’s prefer- (Table 6)ences, and the clinician’s expertise. G. Fluid therapy of severe sepsis 1. We recommend crystalloids be used as the initial ﬂuidF. Infection prevention of choice in the resuscitation of severe sepsis and1. We suggest that selective oral decontamination (SOD) septic shock (grade 1B). and selective digestive decontamination (SDD) should 2. We recommend against the use of hydroxyethyl be introduced and investigated as a method to reduce starches (HES) for ﬂuid resuscitation of severe sepsis the incidence of VAP; this infection control measure and septic shock (grade 1B). (This recommendation is can then be instituted in healthcare settings and regions based on the results of the VISEP , CRYSTMAS where this methodology is found to be effective (grade , 6S , and CHEST  trials. The results of 2B). the recently completed CRYSTAL trial were not2. We suggest oral chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG) be considered.) used as a form of oropharyngeal decontamination to 3. We suggest the use of albumin in the ﬂuid resuscita- reduce the risk of VAP in ICU patients with severe tion of severe sepsis and septic shock when patients sepsis (grade 2B). require substantial amounts of crystalloids (grade 2C).Rationale. Careful infection control practices (e.g., handwashing, expert nursing care, catheter care, barrier pre-cautions, airway management, elevation of the head of the Rationale. The absence of any clear beneﬁt followingbed, subglottic suctioning) should be instituted during the the administration of colloid solutions compared tocare of septic patients as reviewed in the nursing con- crystalloid solutions, together with the expense associatedsiderations for the SSC . The role of SDD with with colloid solutions, supports a high-grade recommen-systemic antimicrobial prophylaxis and its variants (e.g., dation for the use of crystalloid solutions in the initialSOD, CHG) has been a contentious issue ever since the resuscitation of patients with severe sepsis and septicconcept was ﬁrst developed more than 30 years ago. The shock.notion of limiting the acquisition of opportunistic, often Three recent multicenter RCTs evaluating 6 % HESmultiresistant, healthcare-associated microorganisms has 130/0.4 solutions (tetra starches) have been published.its appeal by promoting ‘‘colonization resistance’’ from The CRYSTMAS study demonstrated no difference inthe resident microbiome existing along mucosal surfaces mortality with HES versus 0.9 % normal saline (31 vs.of the alimentary tract. However, the efﬁcacy of SDD, its 25.3 %, P = 0.37) in the resuscitation of septic shocksafety, propensity to prevent or promote antibiotic resis- patients; however, the study was underpowered to detecttance, and cost-effectiveness remain debatable despite a the 6 % difference in absolute mortality observed .number of favorable meta-analyses and controlled clinical In a sicker patient cohort, a Scandinavian multicentertrials . The data indicate an overall reduction in VAP study in septic patients (6S Trial Group) showedbut no consistent improvement in mortality, except in increased mortality rates with 6 % HES 130/0.42 ﬂuidselected populations in some studies. Most studies do not resuscitation compared to Ringer’s acetate (51 vs. 43 %.speciﬁcally address the efﬁcacy of SDD in patients who P = 0.03) . The CHEST study, conducted in a het-present with sepsis, but some do [116–118]. erogenous population of patients admitted to intensive Oral CHG is relatively easy to administer, decreases care (HES vs. isotonic saline, n = 7000 critically illrisk of nosocomial infection, and reduces the potential patients), showed no difference in 90-day mortalityconcern over promotion of antimicrobial resistance by between resuscitation with 6 % HES with a molecularSDD regimens. This remains a subject of considerable weight of 130 kD/0.40 and isotonic saline (18 vs. 17 %,
180Table 6 Recommendations: hemodynamic support and adjunctive therapyG. Fluid therapy of severe sepsis 1. Crystalloids as the initial ﬂuid of choice in the resuscitation of severe sepsis and septic shock (grade 1B). 2. Against the use of hydroxyethyl starches for ﬂuid resuscitation of severe sepsis and septic shock (grade 1B). 3. Albumin in the ﬂuid resuscitation of severe sepsis and septic shock when patients require substantial amounts of crystalloids (grade 2C). 4. Initial ﬂuid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion with suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (a portion of this may be albumin equivalent). More rapid administration and greater amounts of ﬂuid may be needed in some patients (grade 1C). 5. Fluid challenge technique be applied wherein ﬂuid administration is continued as long as there is hemodynamic improvement either based on dynamic (e.g., change in pulse pressure, stroke volume variation) or static (eg, arterial pressure, heart rate) variables (UG).H. Vasopressors 1. Vasopressor therapy initially to target a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 65 mm Hg (grade 1C). 2. Norepinephrine as the ﬁrst choice vasopressor (grade 1B). 3. Epinephrine (added to and potentially substituted for norepinephrine) when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (grade 2B). 4. Vasopressin 0.03 units/minute can be added to norepinephrine (NE) with intent of either raising MAP or decreasing NE dosage (UG). 5. Low dose vasopressin is not recommended as the single initial vasopressor for treatment of sepsis-induced hypotension and vasopressin doses higher than 0.03-0.04 units/minute should be reserved for salvage therapy (failure to achieve adequate MAP with other vasopressor agents) (UG). 6. Dopamine as an alternative vasopressor agent to norepinephrine only in highly selected patients (eg, patients with low risk of tachyarrhythmias and absolute or relative bradycardia) (grade 2C). 7. Phenylephrine is not recommended in the treatment of septic shock except in circumstances where (a) norepinephrine is associated with serious arrhythmias, (b) cardiac output is known to be high and blood pressure persistently low or (c) as salvage therapy when combined inotrope/vasopressor drugs and low dose vasopressin have failed to achieve MAP target (grade 1C). 8. Low-dose dopamine should not be used for renal protection (grade 1A). 9. All patients requiring vasopressors have an arterial catheter placed as soon as practical if resources are available (UG).I. Inotropic therapy 1. A trial of dobutamine infusion up to 20 micrograms/kg/min be administered or added to vasopressor (if in use) in the presence of (a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac ﬁlling pressures and low cardiac output, or (b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion, despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate MAP (grade 1C). 2. Not using a strategy to increase cardiac index to predetermined supranormal levels (grade 1B).J. Corticosteroids 1. Not using intravenous hydrocortisone to treat adult septic shock patients if adequate ﬂuid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (see goals for Initial Resuscitation). In case this is not achievable, we suggest intravenous hydrocortisone alone at a dose of 200 mg per day (grade 2C). 2. Not using the ACTH stimulation test to identify adults with septic shock who should receive hydrocortisone (grade 2B). 3. In treated patients hydrocortisone tapered when vasopressors are no longer required (grade 2D). 4. Corticosteroids not be administered for the treatment of sepsis in the absence of shock (grade 1D). 5. When hydrocortisone is given, use continuous ﬂow (grade 2D).P = 0.26); the need for renal replacement therapy was clinical trial comparing crystalloids and colloids, washigher in the HES group [7.0 vs. 5.8 %; relative risk (RR), recently completed and will provide additional insight1.21; 95 % conﬁdence interval (CI), 1.00–1.45; into HES ﬂuid resuscitation.P = 0.04] . A meta-analysis of 56 randomized trials The SAFE study indicated that albumin administrationfound no overall difference in mortality between crys- was safe and equally as effective as 0.9 % saline . Atalloids and artiﬁcial colloids (modiﬁed gelatins, HES, meta-analysis aggregated data from 17 randomized trialsdextran) when used for initial ﬂuid resuscitation . (n = 1977) of albumin versus other ﬂuid solutions inInformation from 3 randomized trials (n = 704 patients patients with severe sepsis/septic shock ; 279 deathswith severe sepsis/septic shock) did not show survival occurred among 961 albumin-treated patients versus 343beneﬁt with use of heta-, hexa-, or pentastarches com- deaths among 1,016 patients treated with other ﬂuids, thuspared to other ﬂuids (RR, 1.15; 95 % CI, 0.95–1.39; favoring albumin [odds ratio (OR), 0.82; 95 % CI,random effect; I2 = 0 %) [126–128]. However, these 0.67–1.00; I2 = 0 %]. When albumin-treated patientssolutions increased substantially the risk of acute kidney were compared with those receiving crystalloids (7 trials,injury (RR, 1.60; 95 % CI, 1.26–2.04; I2 = 0 %) [126– n = 1441), the OR of dying was signiﬁcantly reduced for128]. The evidence of harm observed in the 6S and albumin-treated patients (OR, 0.78; 95 % CI, 0.62–0.99;CHEST studies and the meta-analysis supports a high- I2 = 0 %). A multicenter randomized trial (n = 794) inlevel recommendation advising against the use of HES patients with septic shock compared intravenous albuminsolutions in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, (20 g, 20 %) every 8 h for 3 days to intravenous salineparticularly since other options for ﬂuid resuscitation solution ; albumin therapy was associated withexist. The CRYSTAL trial, another large prospective 2.2 % absolute reduction in 28-day mortality (from 26.3
181to 24.1 %), but did not achieve statistical signiﬁcance. sepsis-induced hypotension for use of MAP in the diag-These data support a low-level recommendation regarding nosis of severe sepsis is different (MAP 70 mmHg)the use of albumin in patients with sepsis and septic shock from the evidence-based target of 65 mmHg used in this(personal communication from J.P. Mira and as presented recommendation. In any case, the optimal MAP should beat the 32nd International ISICEM Congress 2012, Brus- individualized as it may be higher in patients with ath-sels and the 25th ESICM Annual Congress 2012, Lisbon). erosclerosis and/or previous hypertension than in young patients without cardiovascular comorbidity. For exam-4. We recommend an initial ﬂuid challenge in patients ple, a MAP of 65 mmHg might be too low in a patient with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion with suspi- with severe uncontrolled hypertension; in a young, pre- cion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/ viously normotensive patient, a lower MAP might be kg of crystalloids (a portion of this may be albumin adequate. Supplementing endpoints, such as blood pres- equivalent). More rapid administration and greater sure, with assessment of regional and global perfusion, amounts of ﬂuid may be needed in some patients (see such as blood lactate concentrations, skin perfusion, Initial Resuscitation recommendations) (grade 1C). mental status, and urine output, is important. Adequate5. We recommend that a ﬂuid challenge technique be ﬂuid resuscitation is a fundamental aspect of the hemo- applied wherein ﬂuid administration is continued as long dynamic management of patients with septic shock and as there is hemodynamic improvement either based on should ideally be achieved before vasopressors and ino- dynamic (e.g., change in pulse pressure, stroke volume tropes are used; however, using vasopressors early as an variation) or static (e.g., arterial pressure, heart rate) emergency measure in patients with severe shock is fre- variables (UG). quently necessary, as when diastolic blood pressure is too low. When that occurs, great effort should beRationale. Dynamic tests to assess patients’ responsive- directed to weaning vasopressors with continuing ﬂuidness to ﬂuid replacement have become very popular in resuscitation.recent years in the ICU . These tests are based onmonitoring changes in stroke volume during mechanical 2. We recommend norepinephrine as the ﬁrst-choiceventilation or after passive leg raising in spontaneously vasopressor (grade 1B).breathing patients. A systematic review (29 trials, n = 685 3. We suggest epinephrine (added to and potentiallycritically ill patients) looked at the association between substituted for norepinephrine) when an additionalstroke volume variation, pulse pressure variation, and/or agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressurestroke volume variation and the change in stroke volume/ (grade 2B).cardiac index after a ﬂuid or positive end-expiratory pres- 4. Vasopressin (up to 0.03 U/min) can be added tosure (PEEP) challenge . The diagnostic OR of ﬂuid norepinephrine with the intent of raising MAP to targetresponsiveness was 59.86 (14 trials, 95 % CI, or decreasing norepinephrine dosage (UG).23.88–150.05) and 27.34 (5 trials, 95 % CI, 3.46–55.53) for 5. Low-dose vasopressin is not recommended as thethe pulse pressure variation and the stroke volume variation, single initial vasopressor for treatment of sepsis-respectively. Utility of pulse pressure variation and stroke induced hypotension, and vasopressin doses highervolume variation is limited in the presence of atrial ﬁbril- than 0.03–0.04 U/min should be reserved for salvagelation, spontaneous breathing, and low pressure support therapy (failure to achieve an adequate MAP withbreathing. These techniques generally require sedation. other vasopressor agents) (UG). 6. We suggest dopamine as an alternative vasopressor agent to norepinephrine only in highly selectedH. Vasopressors patients (e.g., patients with low risk of tachyarrhyth-1. We recommend that vasopressor therapy initially tar- mias and absolute or relative bradycardia) (grade 2C). get a MAP of 65 mmHg (grade 1C). 7. Phenylephrine is not recommended in the treatment of septic shock except in the following circumstances:Rationale. Vasopressor therapy is required to sustain (a) norepinephrine is associated with serious arrhyth-life and maintain perfusion in the face of life-threatening mias, (b) cardiac output is known to be high and bloodhypotension, even when hypovolemia has not yet been pressure persistently low, or (c) as salvage therapyresolved. Below a threshold MAP, autoregulation in when combined inotrope/vasopressor drugs and low-critical vascular beds can be lost, and perfusion can dose vasopressin have failed to achieve the MAPbecome linearly dependent on pressure. Thus, some target (grade 1C).patients may require vasopressor therapy to achieve aminimal perfusion pressure and maintain adequate ﬂow Rationale. The physiologic effects of vasopressor and[133, 134]. The titration of norepinephrine to a MAP as combined inotrope/vasopressors selection in septic shocklow as 65 mmHg has been shown to preserve tissue are set out in an extensive number of literature entriesperfusion . Note that the consensus deﬁnition of [135–147]. Table 7 depicts a GRADEpro Summary of
182Table 7 Norepinephrine compared with dopamine in severe sepsis summary of evidenceNorepinephrine compared with dopamine in severe sepsisPatient or population: patients with severe sepsisSettings: intensive care unitIntervention: norepinephrineComparison: dopamineSources: analysis performed by Djillali Annane for Surviving Sepsis Campaign using following publications: De Backer D. N Engl J Med 2010; 362:779–789; Marik PE. JAMA 1994; 272:1354–1357; Mathur RDAC. Indian J Crit Care Med 2007; 11:186–191; Martin C. Chest 1993; 103:1826–1831; Patel GP. Shock 2010; 33:375–380; Ruokonen E. Crit Care Med 1993; 21:1296–1303Outcomes Illustrative comparative risksa (95 % CI) Relative effect No. of Quality of Comments (95 % CI) participants the evidence Assumed risk Corresponding risk (Studies) (GRADE) Dopamine NorepinephrineShort-term Study population RR 0.91 (0.83–0.99) 2,043 (6 studies) ÈÈÈÉ mortality 530 per 1000 482 per 1,000 (440–524) moderateb,cSerious adverse Study population RR 0.47 (0.38–0.58) 1,931 (2 studies) ÈÈÈÉ events— 229 per 1,000 82 per 1,000 (34–195) moderateb,c supraventricular arrhythmiasSerious adverse Study population RR 0.35 (0.19–0.66) 1,931 (2 studies) ÈÈÈÉ events— 39 per 1,000 15 per 1000 moderateb,c ventricular (8–27) arrhythmias bCI conﬁdence interval, RR risk ratio Strong heterogeneity in the results (I2 = 85 %), however, this reﬂects degree ofa The assumed risk is the control group risk across studies. The corre- effect, not direction of effect. We have decided not to lower the evidence quality csponding risk (and its 95 % CI) is based on the assumed risk in the Effect results in part from hypovolemic and cardiogenic shock patients incomparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95 % CI)Evidence Table comparing dopamine and norepinephrine and produces hyperlactatemia, no clinical evidence showsin the treatment of septic shock. Dopamine increases that epinephrine results in worse outcomes, and it should beMAP and cardiac output, primarily due to an increase in the ﬁrst alternative to norepinephrine. Indeed, informationstroke volume and heart rate. Norepinephrine increases from 4 randomized trials (n = 540) comparing norepi-MAP due to its vasoconstrictive effects, with little change nephrine to epinephrine found no evidence for differences inin heart rate and less increase in stroke volume compared the risk of dying (RR, 0.96; CI, 0.77–1.21; ﬁxed effect;with dopamine. Norepinephrine is more potent than I2 = 0 %) [142, 147, 154, 155]. Epinephrine may increasedopamine and may be more effective at reversing hypo- aerobic lactate production via stimulation of skeletal mus-tension in patients with septic shock. Dopamine may be cles’ b2-adrenergic receptors and thus may prevent the useparticularly useful in patients with compromised systolic of lactate clearance to guide resuscitation. With its almostfunction but causes more tachycardia and may be more pure a-adrenergic effects, phenylephrine is the adrenergicarrhythmogenic than norepinephrine . It may also agent least likely to produce tachycardia, but it mayinﬂuence the endocrine response via the hypothalamic decrease stroke volume and is therefore not recommendedpituitary axis and have immunosuppressive effects. for use in the treatment of septic shock except in circum-However, information from ﬁve randomized trials stances where norepinephrine is: (a) associated with serious(n = 1,993 patients with septic shock) comparing nor- arrhythmias, or (b) cardiac output is known to be high, orepinephrine to dopamine does not support the routine use (c) as salvage therapy when other vasopressor agents haveof dopamine in the management of septic shock [136, 149– failed to achieve target MAP . Vasopressin levels in152]. Indeed, the relative risk of short-term mortality was septic shock have been reported to be lower than anticipated0.91 (95 % CI, 0.84–1.00; ﬁxed effect; I2 = 0 %) in favor of for a shock state . Low doses of vasopressin may benorepinephrine. A recent meta-analysis showed dopamine effective in raising blood pressure in patients, refractory towas associated with an increased risk [RR, 1.10 (1.01–1.20); other vasopressors and may have other potential physiologicP = 0.035]; in the two trials that reported arrhythmias, these beneﬁts [158–163]. Terlipressin has similar effects but iswere more frequent with dopamine than with norepinephrine long acting . Studies show that vasopressin concen-[RR, 2.34 (1.46–3.77); P = 0.001] . trations are elevated in early septic shock, but decrease to Although some human and animal studies suggest epi- normal range in the majority of patients between 24 andnephrine has deleterious effects on splanchnic circulation 48 h as shock continues . This has been called relative
183vasopressin deﬁciency because in the presence of hypo- vasopressor (if in use) in the presence of: (a) myocardialtension, vasopressin would be expected to be elevated. The dysfunction, as suggested by elevated cardiac ﬁllingsigniﬁcance of this ﬁnding is unknown. The VASST trial, a pressures and low cardiac output, or (b) ongoing signs ofrandomized, controlled trial comparing norepinephrine hypoperfusion, despite achieving adequate intravascularalone to norepinephrine plus vasopressin at 0.03 U/min, volume and adequate MAP (grade 1C).showed no difference in outcome in the intent-to-treat 2. We recommend against the use of a strategy topopulation . An a priori deﬁned subgroup analysis increase cardiac index to predetermined supranormaldemonstrated that survival among patients receiving levels (grade 1B).15 lg/min norepinephrine at the time of randomizationwas better with the addition of vasopressin; however, the Rationale. Dobutamine is the ﬁrst choice inotrope forpretrial rationale for this stratiﬁcation was based on patients with measured or suspected low cardiac output inexploring potential beneﬁt in the population requiring the presence of adequate left ventricular ﬁlling pressureC15 lg/min norepinephrine. Higher doses of vasopressin (or clinical assessment of adequate ﬂuid resuscitation) andhave been associated with cardiac, digital, and splanchnic adequate MAP. Septic patients who remain hypotensiveischemia and should be reserved for situations where after ﬂuid resuscitation may have low, normal, oralternative vasopressors have failed . Information increased cardiac outputs. Therefore, treatment with afrom 7 trials (n = 963 patients with septic shock) compar- combined inotrope/vasopressor, such as norepinephrine oring norepinephrine with vasopressin (or terlipressin) does epinephrine, is recommended if cardiac output is notnot support the routine use of vasopressin or its analog ter- measured. When the capability exists for monitoringlipressin [93, 95, 97, 99, 159, 161, 164, 166, 168–170]. cardiac output in addition to blood pressure, a vasopres-Indeed, the relative risk of dying was 1.12 (95 % CI, sor, such as norepinephrine, may be used separately to0.96–1.30; ﬁxed effects; I2 = 0 %). However, the risk of target speciﬁc levels of MAP and cardiac output. Largesupraventricular arrhythmias was increased with norepi- prospective clinical trials, which included critically illnephrine (RR, 7.25; 95 % CI, 2.30–22.90; ﬁxed effect; ICU patients who had severe sepsis, failed to demonstrateI2 = 0 %). Cardiac output measurement targeting mainte- beneﬁt from increasing oxygen delivery to supranormalnance of a normal or elevated ﬂow is desirable when these targets by use of dobutamine [173, 174]. These studies didpure vasopressors are instituted. not speciﬁcally target patients with severe sepsis and did not target the ﬁrst 6 h of resuscitation. If evidence of8. We recommend that low-dose dopamine not be used tissue hypoperfusion persists despite adequate intravas- for renal protection (grade 1A). cular volume and adequate MAP, a viable alternative (other than reversing underlying insult) is to add inotropicRationale. A large randomized trial and meta-analysis therapy.comparing low-dose dopamine to placebo found no dif-ference in either primary outcomes (peak serumcreatinine, need for renal replacement, urine output, time J. Corticosteroidsto recovery of normal renal function) or secondary out-comes (survival to either ICU or hospital discharge, ICU 1. We suggest not using intravenous hydrocortisone as astay, hospital stay, arrhythmias) [171, 172]. Thus, the treatment of adult septic shock patients if adequateavailable data do not support administration of low doses ﬂuid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able toof dopamine solely to maintain renal function. restore hemodynamic stability (see goals for Initial Resuscitation). If this is not achievable, we suggest9. We recommend that all patients requiring vasopressors intravenous hydrocortisone alone at a dose of 200 mg have an arterial catheter placed as soon as practical if per day (grade 2C). resources are available (UG). Rationale. The response of septic shock patients to ﬂuidRationale. In shock states, estimation of blood pressure and vasopressor therapy seems to be an important factorusing a cuff is commonly inaccurate; use of an arterial cannula in selection of patients for optional hydrocortisone ther-provides a more appropriate and reproducible measurement apy. One French multicenter RCT of patients inof arterial pressure. These catheters also allow continuous vasopressor-unresponsive septic shock (hypotensionanalysis so that decisions regarding therapy can be based on despite ﬂuid resuscitation and vasopressors for more thanimmediate and reproducible blood pressure information. 60 min) showed signiﬁcant shock reversal and reduction of mortality rate in patients with relative adrenal insufﬁ- ciency [deﬁned as postadrenocorticotropic hormoneI. Inotropic therapy (ACTH) cortisol increase B9 lg/dL] . Two smaller1. We recommend that a trial of dobutamine infusion up RCTs also showed signiﬁcant effects on shock reversal to 20 lg kg-1 min-1 be administered or added to with steroid therapy [176, 177]. In contrast, a large,
184European multicenter trial (CORTICUS) that enrolled . Although the clinical signiﬁcance is not clear, it ispatients without sustained shock and had a lower risk of now recognized that etomidate, when used for inductiondeath than the French trial failed to show a mortality for intubation, will suppress the hypothalamic–pituitary–beneﬁt with steroid therapy . Unlike the French trial adrenal axis [185, 186]. Moreover, a subanalysis of thethat only enrolled shock patients with blood pressure CORTICUS trial  revealed that the use of etomidateunresponsive to vasopressor therapy, the CORTICUS before application of low-dose steroids was associatedstudy included patients with septic shock regardless of with an increased 28-day mortality rate . An inap-how the blood pressure responded to vasopressors; the propriately low random cortisol level (18 lg/dL) in astudy baseline (placebo) 28-day mortality rate was 61 and patient with shock would be considered an indication for31 %, respectively. The use of the ACTH test (responders steroid therapy along traditional adrenal insufﬁciencyand nonresponders) did not predict the faster resolution of guidelines.shock. In recent years, several systematic reviews haveexamined the use of low-dose hydrocortisone in septic 3. We suggest that clinicians taper the treated patientshock with contradictory results: Annane et al.  from steroid therapy when vasopressors are no longeranalyzed the results of 12 studies and calculated a sig- required (grade 2D).niﬁcant reduction in 28-day mortality with prolongedlow-dose steroid treatment in adult septic shock patients Rationale. There has been no comparative study(RR, 0.84; 95 % CI, 0.72–0.97; P = 0.02). In parallel, between a ﬁxed-duration and clinically guided regimen orSligl and colleagues  used a similar technique, but between tapering and abrupt cessation of steroids. Threeonly identiﬁed eight studies for their meta-analysis, six of RCTs used a ﬁxed-duration protocol for treatment [175,which had a high-level RCT design with low risk of bias 177, 178], and therapy was decreased after shock reso-. In contrast to the aforementioned review, this lution in two RCTs [176, 182]. In four studies, steroidsanalysis revealed no statistically signiﬁcant difference in were tapered over several days [176–178, 182], and ste-mortality (RR, 1.00; 95 % CI, 0.84–1.18). Both reviews, roids were withdrawn abruptly in two RCTs [175, 183].however, conﬁrmed the improved shock reversal by using One crossover study showed hemodynamic and immu-low-dose hydrocortisone [180, 181]. A recent review on nologic rebound effects after abrupt cessation ofthe use of steroids in adult septic shock underlined the corticosteroids . Furthermore, a study revealed thatimportance of selection of studies for systematic analysis there is no difference in outcome of septic shock patients and identiﬁed only 6 high-level RCTs as adequate if low-dose hydrocortisone is used for 3 or 7 days; hence,for systematic review [175–178, 182, 183]. When only no recommendation can be given with regard to thethese six studies are analyzed, we found that in ‘‘low risk’’ optimal duration of hydrocortisone therapy .patients from three studies (i.e., those with a placebo 4. We recommend that corticosteroids not be adminis-mortality rate of less than 50 %, which represents the tered for the treatment of sepsis in the absence ofmajority of all patients), hydrocortisone failed to show shock (grade 1D).any beneﬁt on outcome (RR 1.06). The minority of patientsfrom the remaining three studies, who had a placebo mor- Rationale. Steroids may be indicated in the presence oftality of greater than 60 %, showed a nonsigniﬁcant trend to a history of steroid therapy or adrenal dysfunction, butlower mortality by using hydrocortisone. See Supplemental whether low-dose steroids have a preventive potency inDigital Content 4, Summary of Evidence Table. reducing the incidence of severe sepsis and septic shock2. We suggest not using the ACTH stimulation test to in critically ill patients cannot be answered. A preliminary identify the subset of adults with septic shock who study of stress-dose level steroids in community-acquired should receive hydrocortisone (grade 2B). pneumonia showed improved outcome measures in a small population , and a recent conﬁrmatory RCTRationale. In one study, the observation of a potential revealed reduced hospital length of stay without affectinginteraction between steroid use and ACTH test was not mortality .statistically signiﬁcant . Furthermore, no evidence of 5. When low-dose hydrocortisone is given, we suggestthis distinction was observed between responders and using continuous infusion rather than repetitive bolusnonresponders in a recent multicenter trial . Random injections (grade 2D).cortisol levels may still be useful for absolute adrenalinsufﬁciency; however, for septic shock patients who Rationale. Several randomized trials on the use of low-suffer from relative adrenal insufﬁciency (no adequate dose hydrocortisone in septic shock patients revealed astress response), random cortisol levels have not been signiﬁcant increase of hyperglycemia and hypernatremiademonstrated to be useful. Cortisol immunoassays may  as side effects. A small prospective study demon-over- or underestimate the actual cortisol level, affecting strated that repetitive bolus application of hydrocortisonethe assignment of patients to responders or nonresponders leads to a signiﬁcant increase in blood glucose; this peak
185effect was not detectable during continuous infusion. of erythropoietin in severe sepsis and septic shock wouldFurthermore, considerable inter-individual variability was not be expected to be more beneﬁcial than in other criticalseen in this blood glucose peak after the hydrocortisone conditions. Patients with severe sepsis and septic shockbolus . Although an association of hyperglycemia may have coexisting conditions that meet indications forand hypernatremia with patient outcome measures could the use of erythropoietin.not be shown, good practice includes strategies foravoidance and/or detection of these side effects. 3. We suggest that fresh frozen plasma not be used to correct laboratory clotting abnormalities in the absence of bleeding or planned invasive procedures (grade 2D).Supportive therapy of severe sepsis (Table 8) Rationale. Although clinical studies have not assessedK. Blood product administration the impact of transfusion of fresh frozen plasma on out-1. Once tissue hypoperfusion has resolved and in the comes in critically ill patients, professional organizations absence of extenuating circumstances, such as myocar- have recommended it for coagulopathy when there is a dial ischemia, severe hypoxemia, acute hemorrhage, or documented deﬁciency of coagulation factors (increased ischemic coronary artery disease, we recommend that prothrombin time, international normalized ratio, or par- red blood cell transfusion occur when the hemoglobin tial thromboplastin time) and the presence of active concentration decreases to 7.0 g/dL to target a hemo- bleeding or before surgical or invasive procedures [200– globin concentration of 7.0–9.0 g/dL in adults (grade 203]. In addition, transfusion of fresh frozen plasma 1B). usually fails to correct the prothrombin time in nonblee- ding patients with mild abnormalities [204, 205]. No studies suggest that correction of more severe coagulation abnormalities beneﬁts patients who are not bleeding.Rationale. Although the optimum hemoglobin concen- 4. We recommend against antithrombin administrationtration for patients with severe sepsis has not been for the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shockspeciﬁcally investigated, the Transfusion Requirements in (grade 1B).Critical Care trial suggested that a hemoglobin level of7–9 g/dL, compared with 10–12 g/dL, was not associated Rationale. A phase III clinical trial of high-dose anti-with increased mortality in critically ill adults . No thrombin did not demonstrate any beneﬁcial effect onsigniﬁcant differences in 30-day mortality rates were 28-day all-cause mortality in adults with severe sepsis andobserved between treatment groups in the subgroup of septic shock. High-dose antithrombin was associated withpatients with severe infections and septic shock (22.8 and an increased risk of bleeding when administered with29.7 %, respectively; P = 0.36), heparin . Although a post hoc subgroup analysis of Although less applicable to septic patients, results of a patients with severe sepsis and high risk of death showedrandomized trial in patients undergoing cardiac surgery better survival in patients receiving antithrombin, thiswith cardiopulmonary bypass support a restrictive trans- agent cannot be recommended until further clinical trialsfusion strategy using a threshold hematocrit of 24 % are performed .(hemoglobin & 8 g/dL) as equivalent to a transfusionthreshold of hematocrit of 30 % (hemoglobin & 10 g/ 5. In patients with severe sepsis, we suggest that plateletsdL) . Red blood cell transfusion in septic patients be administered prophylactically when counts areincreases oxygen delivery but does not usually increase B10,000/mm3 (10 9 109/L) in the absence of apparentoxygen consumption [195–197]. The transfusion thresh- bleeding, as well when counts are B20,000/mm3old of 7 g/dL contrasts with early goal-directed (20 9 109/L) if the patient has a signiﬁcant risk ofresuscitation protocols that use a target hematocrit of bleeding. Higher platelet counts [C50,000/mm330 % in patients with low ScvO2 during the ﬁrst 6 h of (50 9 109/L)] are advised for active bleeding, surgery,resuscitation of septic shock . or invasive procedures (grade 2D).2. We recommend not using erythropoietin as a speciﬁc Rationale. Guidelines for transfusion of platelets are treatment of anemia associated with severe sepsis derived from consensus opinion and experience in (grade 1B). patients with chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia. Patients with severe sepsis are likely to have some limi-Rationale. No speciﬁc information regarding erythro- tation of platelet production similar to that inpoietin use in septic patients is available, but clinical trials chemotherapy-treated patients, but they also are likely toof erythropoietin administration in critically ill patients have increased platelet consumption. Recommendationsshow some decrease in red cell transfusion requirement take into account the etiology of thrombocytopenia,with no effect on clinical outcome [198, 199]. The effect platelet dysfunction, risk of bleeding, and presence of
186Table 8 Recommendations: other supportive therapy of severe sepsisK. Blood product administration 1. Once tissue hypoperfusion has resolved and in the absence of extenuating circumstances, such as myocardial ischemia, severe hypoxemia, acute hemorrhage, or ischemic heart disease, we recommend that red blood cell transfusion occur only when hemoglobin concentration decreases to 7.0 g/dL to target a hemoglobin concentration of 7.0–9.0 g/dL in adults (grade 1B). 2. Not using erythropoietin as a speciﬁc treatment of anemia associated with severe sepsis (grade 1B). 3. Fresh frozen plasma not be used to correct laboratory clotting abnormalities in the absence of bleeding or planned invasive procedures (grade 2D). 4. Not using antithrombin for the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock (grade 1B). 5. In patients with severe sepsis, administer platelets prophylactically when counts are B10,000/mm3 (10 9 109/L) in the absence of apparent bleeding. We suggest prophylactic platelet transfusion when counts are B20,000/mm3 (20 9 109/L) if the patient has a signiﬁcant risk of bleeding. Higher platelet counts (C50,000/mm3 [50 9 109/L]) are advised for active bleeding, surgery, or invasive procedures (grade 2D).L. Immunoglobulins 1. Not using intravenous immunoglobulins in adult patients with severe sepsis or septic shock (grade 2B).M. Selenium 1. Not using intravenous selenium for the treatment of severe sepsis (grade 2C).N. History of Recommendations Regarding Use of Recombinant Activated Protein C (rhAPC) A history of the evolution of SSC recommendations as to rhAPC (no longer available) is provided.O. Mechanical ventilation of sepsis-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) 1. Target a tidal volume of 6 mL/kg predicted body weight in patients with sepsis-induced ARDS (grade 1A vs. 12 mL/kg). 2. Plateau pressures be measured in patients with ARDS and initial upper limit goal for plateau pressures in a passively inﬂated lung be B30 cm H2O (grade 1B). 3. Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) be applied to avoid alveolar collapse at end expiration (atelectotrauma) (grade 1B). 4. Strategies based on higher rather than lower levels of PEEP be used for patients with sepsis- induced moderate or severe ARDS (grade 2C). 5. Recruitment maneuvers be used in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia (grade 2C). 6. Prone positioning be used in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a PaO2/FIO2 ratio B100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (grade 2B). 7. That mechanically ventilated sepsis patients be maintained with the head of the bed elevated to 30–45 degrees to limit aspiration risk and to prevent the development of ventilator-associated pneumonia (grade 1B). 8. That noninvasive mask ventilation (NIV) be used in that minority of sepsis-induced ARDS patients in whom the beneﬁts of NIV have been carefully considered and are thought to outweigh the risks (grade 2B). 9. That a weaning protocol be in place and that mechanically ventilated patients with severe sepsis undergo spontaneous breathing trials regularly to evaluate the ability to discontinue mechanical ventilation when they satisfy the following criteria: a) arousable; b) hemodynamically stable (without vasopressor agents); c) no new potentially serious conditions; d) low ventilatory and end-expiratory pressure requirements; and e) low FIo2 requirements which can be met safely delivered with a face mask or nasal cannula. If the spontaneous breathing trial is successful, consideration should be given for extubation (grade 1A). 10. Against the routine use of the pulmonary artery catheter for patients with sepsis-induced ARDS (grade 1A). 11. A conservative rather than liberal ﬂuid strategy for patients with established sepsis-induced ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (grade 1C). 12. In the absence of speciﬁc indications such as bronchospasm, not using beta 2-agonists for treatment of sepsis- induced ARDS. (Grade 1B).P. Sedation, analgesia, and neuromuscular blockade in sepsis 1. Continuous or intermittent sedation be minimized in mechanically ventilated sepsis patients, targeting speciﬁc titration endpoints (grade 1B). 2. Neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) be avoided if possible in the septic patient without ARDS due to the risk of prolonged neuromuscular blockade following discontinuation. If NMBAs must be maintained, either intermittent bolus as required or continuous infusion with train-of-four monitoring of the depth of blockade should be used (grade 1C). 3. A short course of NMBA of not greater than 48 hours for patients with early sepsis-induced ARDS and a PaO2/FIO2 150 mm Hg (grade 2C).Q. Glucose control 1. A protocolized approach to blood glucose management in ICU patients with severe sepsis commencing insulin dosing when 2 consecutive blood glucose levels are [180 mg/dL. This protocolized approach should target an upper blood glucose B180 mg/dL rather than an upper target blood glucose B110 mg/dL (grade 1A). 2. blood glucose values be monitored every 1–2 hrs until glucose values and insulin infusion rates are stable and then every 4 hrs thereafter (grade 1C). 3. glucose levels obtained with point-of-care testing of capillary blood be interpreted with caution, as such measurements may not accurately estimate arterial blood or plasma glucose values (UG).R. Renal replacement therapy 1. Continuous renal replacement therapies and intermittent hemodialysis are equivalent in patients with severe sepsis and acute renal failure (grade 2B). 2. Use continuous therapies to facilitate management of ﬂuid balance in hemodynamically unstable septic patients (grade 2D).
187Table 8 continuedS. Bicarbonate therapy 1. Not using sodium bicarbonate therapy for the purpose of improving hemodynamics or reducing vasopressor requirements in patients with hypoperfusion-induced lactic acidemia with pH C7.15 (grade 2B).T. Deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis 1. Patients with severe sepsis receive daily pharmacoprophylaxis against venous thromboembolism (VTE) (grade 1B). This should be accomplished with daily subcutaneous low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) (grade 1B versus twice daily UFH, grade 2C versus three times daily UFH). If creatinine clearance is 30 mL/min, use dalteparin (grade 1A) or another form of LMWH that has a low degree of renal metabolism (grade 2C) or UFH (grade 1A). 2. Patients with severe sepsis be treated with a combination of pharmacologic therapy and intermittent pneumatic compression devices whenever possible (grade 2C). 3. Septic patients who have a contraindication for heparin use (eg, thrombocytopenia, severe coagulopathy, active bleeding, recent intracerebral hemorrhage) not receive pharmacoprophylaxis (grade 1B), but receive mechanical prophylactic treatment, such as graduated compression stockings or intermittent compression devices (grade 2C), unless contraindicated. When the risk decreases start pharmacoprophylaxis (grade 2C).U. Stress ulcer prophylaxis 1. Stress ulcer prophylaxis using H2 blocker or proton pump inhibitor be given to patients with severe sepsis/septic shock who have bleeding risk factors (grade 1B). 2. When stress ulcer prophylaxis is used, proton pump inhibitors rather than H2RA (grade 2D) 3. Patients without risk factors do not receive prophylaxis (grade 2B).V. Nutrition 1. Administer oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the ﬁrst 48 hours after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (grade 2C). 2. Avoid mandatory full caloric feeding in the ﬁrst week but rather suggest low dose feeding (e.g., up to 500 calories per day), advancing only as tolerated (grade 2B). 3. Use intravenous glucose and enteral nutrition rather than total parenteral nutrition (TPN) alone or parenteral nutrition in conjunction with enteral feeding in the ﬁrst 7 days after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (grade 2B). 4. Use nutrition with no speciﬁc immunomodulating supplementation rather than nutrition providing speciﬁc immunomodulating supplementation in patients with severe sepsis (grade 2C).W. Setting goals of care 1. Discuss goals of care and prognosis with patients and families (grade 1B). 2. Incorporate goals of care into treatment and end-of-life care planning, utilizing palliative care principles where appropriate (grade 1B). 3. Address goals of care as early as feasible, but no later than within 72 hours of ICU admission (grade 2C).concomitant disorders [200, 202, 203, 208, 209]. Factors immunoglobulin (Ig) M-enriched polyclonal IVIGthat may increase the bleeding risk and indicate the need (n = 528) . Compared with placebo, IVIG resultedfor a higher platelet count are frequently present in in a signiﬁcant reduction in mortality (RR, 0.81 and 95 %patients with severe sepsis. Sepsis itself is considered to CI, 0.70–0.93; and RR, 0.66 and 95 % CI, 0.51–0.85,be a risk factor for bleeding in patients with chemother- respectively). Also the subgroup of IgM-enriched IVIGsapy-induced thrombocytopenia. Other factors considered (n = 7 trials) showed a signiﬁcant reduction in mortalityto increase the risk of bleeding in patients with severe rates compared with placebo (RR, 0.66; 95 % CI,sepsis include temperature higher than 38 °C, recent 0.51–0.85). Trials with low risk of bias showed nominor hemorrhage, rapid decrease in platelet count, and reduction in mortality with polyclonal IVIG (RR, 0.97;other coagulation abnormalities [203, 208, 209]. 95 % CI, 0.81–1.15; ﬁve trials, n = 945). Three of these trials [210, 213, 214] used standard polyclonal IVIG and two IgM-enriched IVIG [215, 216].L. Immunoglobulins These ﬁndings are in accordance with those of 2 older1. We suggest not using intravenous immunoglobulins meta-analyses [217, 218] from other Cochrane authors. in adult patients with severe sepsis or septic shock One systematic review  included a total of 21 trials (grade 2B). and showed a relative risk of death of 0.77 with immu- noglobulin treatment (95 % CI, 0.68–0.88); however, theRationale. One larger multicenter RCT (n = 624)  results of only high-quality trials (total of 763 patients)in adult patients and one large multinational RCT in showed a relative risk of 1.02 (95 % CI, 0.84–1.24).infants with neonatal sepsis (n = 3,493)  found no Similarly, Laupland et al.  found a signiﬁcantbeneﬁt for intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). (For reduction in mortality with the use of IVIG treatmentmore on this trial, see ‘‘Pediatric considerations in severe (OR, 0.66; 95 % CI, 0.53–0.83; P 0.005). When onlysepsis’’.). A meta-analysis by the Cochrane collaboration, high-quality studies were pooled, the OR for mortalitywhich did not include this most recent RCT, identiﬁed 10 was 0.96 (95 % CI, 0.71–1.3; P = 0.78). Two meta-polyclonal IVIG trials (n = 1,430) and seven trials on analyses, which used less strict criteria to identify sources
188of bias or did not state their criteria for the assessment of (glutamine was also tested in a two-factorial design) tostudy quality, found signiﬁcant improvement in patient parenteral nutrition in critically ill patients reducesmortality with IVIG treatment [219, 220]. In contrast to infections and improves outcome . Selenium supple-the most recent Cochrane review, Kreymann et al.  mentation did not signiﬁcantly affect the development of aclassiﬁed ﬁve studies that investigated IgM-enriched new infection (OR, 0.81; 95 % CI, 0.57–1.15), and thepreparation as high-quality studies, combining studies in 6-month mortality rate was not unaffected (OR, 0.89; 95 %adults and neonates, and found an OR for mortality of 0.5 CI, 0.62–1.29). In addition, length of stay, days of antibiotic(95 % CI, 0.34–0.73). use, and modiﬁed Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Most IVIG studies are small, some have methodo- score were not signiﬁcantly affected by selenium .logical ﬂaws; the only large study (n = 624) showed no In addition to the lack of evidence, the questions ofeffect . Subgroup effects between IgM-enriched and optimal dosing and application mode remain unanswered.nonenriched formulations reveal substantial heterogene- Reported high-dose regimens have involved a loading doseity. In addition, indirectness and publication bias were followed by an infusion, while animal trials suggest thatconsidered in grading this recommendation. The low- bolus dosing could be more effective ; this, however,quality evidence led to the grading as a weak recom- has not been tested in humans. These unsolved problemsmendation. The statistical information that comes from require additional trials, and we encourage conducting largethe high-quality trials does not support a beneﬁcial effect multicenter studies to further evaluate the effectiveness ofof polyclonal IVIG. We encourage conducting large intravenous selenium in patients with severe sepsis. Thismulticenter studies to further evaluate the effectiveness of recommendation does not exclude the use of low-doseother polyclonal immunoglobulin preparations given selenium as part of the standard minerals and oligo-ele-intravenously in patients with severe sepsis. ments used during total parenteral nutrition (TPN).M. Selenium N. History of recommendations regarding use1. We suggest not using intravenous selenium to treat of recombinant activated protein C severe sepsis (grade 2C). Recombinant human activated protein C (rhAPC) wasRationale. Selenium was administered in the hope that it approved for use in adult patients in a number of countriescould correct the known reduction of selenium concentra- in 2001 following the Recombinant Human Activatedtion in sepsis patients and provide a pharmacologic effect Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsisthrough an antioxidant defense. Although some randomized (PROWESS) trial, which enrolled 1,690 severe sepsiscontrolled trials are available, the evidence on the use of patients and showed a signiﬁcant reduction in mortalityintravenous selenium is still very weak. Only one large (24.7 %) with rhAPC compared with placebo (30.8 %,clinical trial has examined the effect on mortality rates, and P = 0.005) . The 2004 SSC guidelines recom-no signiﬁcant impact was reported on the intent-to-treat mended use of rhAPC in line with the product labelingpopulation with severe systemic inﬂammatory response instructions required by the US and European regulatorysyndrome, sepsis, or septic shock (OR, 0.66; 95 % CI, authorities with a grade B quality of evidence [7, 8].0.39–1.10; P = 0.109) . Overall, there was a trend By the time of publication of the 2008 SSC guidelines,toward a concentration-dependent reduction in mortality; no additional studies of rhAPC in severe sepsis (as requireddifferences in secondary outcomes or adverse events were by regulatory agencies) had shown it ineffective in lessdetected. Finally, no comment on standardization of sepsis severely ill patients with severe sepsis as well as inmanagement was included in this study, which recruited 249 children [229, 230]. The 2008 SSC recommendationspatients over a period of 6 years (1999–2004) . reﬂected these ﬁndings, and the strength of the rhAPC A French RCT in a small population revealed no effect recommendation was downgraded to a suggestion for useon primary (shock reversal) or secondary (days on in adult patients with a clinical assessment of high risk ofmechanical ventilation, ICU mortality) endpoints . death, most of whom will have Acute Physiology andAnother small RCT revealed less early VAP in the selenium Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II scores C25 orgroup (P = 0.04), but no difference in late VAP or sec- multiple organ failure (grade 2C; quality of evidence wasondary outcomes such as ICU or hospital mortality . also downgraded from 2004, from B to C) . The 2008This is in accordance with 2 RCTs that resulted in reduced guidelines also recommended against use of rhAPC innumber of infectious episodes  or increase in gluta- low-risk adult patients, most of whom will have APACHEthione peroxidase concentrations ; neither study, II scores B20 or single organ failures (grade 1A), andhowever, showed a beneﬁcial effect on secondary outcome against use in all pediatric patients (grade 1B).measures (renal replacement, ICU mortality) [224, 225]. The results of the PROWESS SHOCK trial (1,696 A more recent large RCT tried to determine if the patients) were released in late 2011, showing no beneﬁt ofaddition of relatively low doses of supplemental selenium rhAPC in patients with septic shock (mortality 26.4 % for
189rhAPC, 24.2 % placebo) with a relative risk of 1.09 and a patients who are passively inﬂated. Conversely, patientsP value of 0.31 . The drug was withdrawn from the with very stiff chest walls may require plateau pressuresmarket and is no longer available, negating any need for [30 cmH2O to meet vital clinical objectives. A retro-an SSC recommendation regarding its use. spective study suggested that tidal volumes should be lowered even with plateau pressures B30 cmH2O  as lower plateau pressures were associated with decreasedO. Mechanical ventilation of sepsis-induced acute in-hospital mortality .respiratory distress syndrome High tidal volumes that are coupled with high plateau1. We recommend that clinicians target a tidal volume of pressures should be avoided in ARDS. Clinicians should 6 mL/kg predicted body weight in patients with sepsis- use as a starting point the objective of reducing tidal induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) volume over 1–2 h from its initial value toward the goal (grade 1A vs. 12 mL/kg). of a ‘‘low’’ tidal volume (&6 mL/kg PBW) achieved in2. We recommend that plateau pressures be measured in conjunction with an end-inspiratory plateau pressure patients with ARDS and that the initial upper limit B30 cmH2O. If the plateau pressure remains [30 cmH2O goal for plateau pressures in a passively inﬂated lung after reduction of tidal volume to 6 mL/kg PBW, tidal be B 30 cmH2O (grade 1B). volume may be reduced further to as low as 4 mL/kg PBW per protocol. (Appendix 3 provides ARDSNetRationale. Of note, studies used to determine recom- ventilator management and formulas to calculate PBW.)mendations in this section enrolled patients using criteria Using volume- and pressure-limited ventilation may leadfrom the American-European Consensus Criteria Deﬁni- to hypercapnia with maximum tolerated set respiratorytion for Acute Lung Injury (ALI) and ARDS . For this rates. In such cases, hypercapnia that is otherwise notdocument, we have used the updated Berlin deﬁnition and contraindicated (e.g., high intracranial pressure) andused the terms mild, moderate, and severe ARDS (PaO2/ appears to be tolerated should be allowed. SodiumFIO2 B300, B200, and B100 mm Hg, respectively) for bicarbonate or tromethamine (THAM) infusion may bethe syndromes previously known as ALI and ARDS . considered in selected patients to facilitate use of limitedSeveral multicenter randomized trials have been per- ventilator conditions that result in permissive hypercapniaformed in patients with established ARDS to evaluate the [246, 247].effects of limiting inspiratory pressure through moderation A number of observational trials in mechanicallyof tidal volume [234–238]. These studies showed differing ventilated patients have demonstrated a decreased risk ofresults that may have been caused by differences in airway developing ARDS when smaller trial volumes are usedpressures in the treatment and control groups [233, 234, [248–251]. Accordingly, high tidal volumes and plateau239]. Several meta-analyses suggest decreased mortality in pressures should be avoided in mechanically ventilatedpatients with a pressure- and volume-limited strategy for patients at risk for developing ARDS, including thoseestablished ARDS [240, 241]. with sepsis. The largest trial of a volume- and pressure-limited No single mode of ventilation (pressure control, vol-strategy showed an absolute 9 % decrease in all-cause ume control) has consistently been shown to bemortality in patients with ARDS ventilated with tidal advantageous when compared with any other that respectsvolumes of 6 mL/kg compared with 12 mL/kg of pre- the same principles of lung protection.dicted body weight (PBW), and aiming for a plateau 3. We recommend that PEEP be applied to avoid alveolarpressure B30 cm H2O . The use of lung-protective collapse at end expiration (atelectotrauma) (grade 1B).strategies for patients with ARDS is supported by clinical 4. We suggest strategies based on higher rather thantrials and has been widely accepted, but the precise choice lower levels of PEEP for patients with sepsis-inducedof tidal volume for an individual patient with ARDS may moderate to severe ARDS (grade 2C).require adjustment for such factors as the plateau pressureachieved, the level of PEEP chosen, the compliance of the Rationale. Raising PEEP in ARDS keeps lung unitsthoracoabdominal compartment, and the vigor of the open to participate in gas exchange. This will increasepatient’s breathing effort. Patients with profound meta- PaO2 when PEEP is applied through either an endotra-bolic acidosis, high obligate minute ventilations, or short cheal tube or a face mask [252–254]. In animalstature may require additional manipulation of tidal vol- experiments, avoidance of end-expiratory alveolar col-umes. Some clinicians believe it may be safe to ventilate lapse helps minimize ventilator-induced lung injury whenwith tidal volumes [6 mL/kg PBW as long as the plateau relatively high plateau pressures are in use. Three largepressure can be maintained B30 cm H2O [242, 243]. The multicenter trials using higher versus lower levels ofvalidity of this ceiling value will depend on the patient’s PEEP in conjunction with low tidal volumes did noteffort, as those who are actively breathing generate higher uncover beneﬁt or harm [255–257]. A meta-analysis usingtransalveolar pressures for a given plateau pressure than individual patient data showed no beneﬁt in all patients
190with ARDS; however, patients with moderate or severe release ventilation, and extracorporeal membrane oxygen-ARDS (Pao2/FIo2 ratio B200 mm Hg) had decreased ation , may be considered as rescue therapies in centersmortality with the use of higher PEEP, whereas those with with expertise and experience with their use [261, 271–274].mild ARDS did not . Two options are recommended Inhaled nitric oxide does not improve mortality rates infor PEEP titration. One option is to titrate PEEP (and tidal patients with ARDS and should not be routinely used .volume) according to bedside measurements of thoraco-pulmonary compliance with the objective of obtaining the 7. We recommend that mechanically ventilated sepsisbest compliance, reﬂecting a favorable balance of lung patients be maintained with the head of the bed ele-recruitment and overdistension . The second option vated between 30 and 45 degrees to limit aspirationis to titrate PEEP based on severity of oxygenation deﬁcit risk and to prevent the development of VAPand guided by the FIo2 required to maintain adequate (grade 1B).oxygenation [234, 255, 256]. A PEEP[5 cm H20 is usuallyrequired to avoid lung collapse . The ARDSNet Rationale. The semi-recumbent position has beenstandard PEEP strategy is shown in Appendix 3. The higher demonstrated to decrease the incidence of VAP .PEEP strategy recommended for ARDS is shown in Enteral feeding increased the risk of developing VAP; 50 %Appendix 4 and comes from the ALVEOLI trial . of the patients who were fed enterally in the supine position developed VAP compared with 9 % of those fed in the semi-5. We suggest recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients recumbent position . However, the bed position was with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (grade monitored only once a day, and patients who did not achieve 2C). the desired bed elevation were not included in the analysis6. We suggest prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS . One study did not show a difference in incidence of patients with a PaO2/FiO2 ratio B100 mmHg in facilities VAP between patients maintained in supine and semi- that have experience with such practices (grade 2B). recumbent positions ; patients assigned to the semi- recumbent group did not consistently achieve the desiredRationale. Many strategies exist for treating refractory head of the bed elevation, and the head of bed elevation inhypoxemia in patients with severe ARDS . Tempo- the supine group approached that of the semi-recumbentrarily raising transpulmonary pressure may facilitate group by day 7 . When necessary, patients may be laidopening atelectatic alveoli to permit gas exchange , ﬂat for procedures, hemodynamic measurements, and dur-but could also overdistend aerated lung units leading to ing episodes of hypotension. Patients should not be fedventilator-induced lung injury and temporary hypoten- enterally while supine.sion. The application of transient sustained use ofcontinuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) appears to 8. We suggest that noninvasive mask ventilation (NIV) beimprove oxygenation in patients initially, but these effects used in that minority of sepsis-induced ARDS patients incan be transient . Although selected patients with whom the beneﬁts of NIV have been carefully consid-severe hypoxemia may beneﬁt from recruitment maneu- ered and are thought to outweigh the risks (grade 2B).vers in conjunction with higher levels of PEEP, littleevidence supports the routine use in all ARDS patients Rationale. Obviating the need for airway intubation. Blood pressure and oxygenation should be moni- confers multiple advantages: better communication, lowertored and recruitment maneuvers discontinued if incidence of infection, and reduced requirements fordeterioration in these variables is observed. sedation. Two RCTs in patients with acute respiratory Several small studies and one large study in patients failure demonstrated improved outcome with the use ofwith hypoxemic respiratory failure or ARDS have shown NIV when it can be used successfully [278, 279].that most patients respond to the prone position with Unfortunately, only a small percentage of sepsis patientsimproved oxygenation [263–266]. None of the individual with life-threatening hypoxemia can be managed in thistrials of prone positioning in patients with ARDS or way [280, 281].hypoxemic respiratory failure demonstrated a mortality ben- NIV should be considered in patients with sepsis-eﬁt [267–270]. One meta-analysis suggested potential induced ARDS if they are responsive to relatively low levelsbeneﬁts for prone positioning in patients with profound hyp- of pressure support and PEEP with stable hemodynamics,oxemia and PaO2/FiO2 ratio B100 mmHg, but not in those can be made comfortable, and are easily arousable; if theywith less severe hypoxemia . Prone positioning may be are able to protect the airway and spontaneously clear theassociated with potentially life-threatening complications, airway of secretions; and if they are anticipated to recoverincluding accidental dislodging of the endotracheal and chest rapidly from the precipitating insult [280, 281]. A lowtubes; these complications occur more frequently in patients threshold for airway intubation should be maintained.in the prone compared with supine position . 9. We recommend that a weaning protocol be in place Other methods to treat refractory hypoxemia, including and that mechanically ventilated patients with severehigh-frequency oscillatory ventilation, airway pressure sepsis undergo spontaneous breathing trials regularly
191 to evaluate the ability to discontinue mechanical ven- ventilation [297, 298]. A ﬂuid-conservative strategy to tilation when they satisfy the following criteria: minimize ﬂuid infusion and weight gain in patients with (a) arousable; (b) hemodynamically stable (without ARDS, based on either a central venous catheter (CVP vasopressor agents); (c) no new potentially serious 4 mmHg) or a PA catheter (pulmonary artery wedge conditions; (d) low ventilatory and end-expiratory pressure8 mmHg), along with clinical variables to guide pressure requirements; and (e) low FiO2 requirements treatment, led to fewer days of mechanical ventilation and which can be safely delivered with a face mask or nasal reduced length of ICU stay without altering the incidence of cannula. If the spontaneous breathing trial is successful,renal failure or mortality rates . This strategy was only extubation should be considered (grade 1A). used in patients with established ARDS, some of whom had shock present during the ICU stay, and active attempts toRationale. Spontaneous breathing trial options include a reduce ﬂuid volume were conducted only outside periods oflow level of pressure support, CPAP (&5 cmH2O), or a shock.use of a T-piece. Studies demonstrated that daily spon-taneous breathing trials in appropriately selected patients 12. In the absence of speciﬁc indications such as bron-reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation [282, 283]. chospasm, we recommend against the use ofThese breathing trials should be conducted in conjunction b2-agonists for treatment of patients with sepsis-with a spontaneous awakening trial . Successful induced ARDS (grade 1B).completion of spontaneous breathing trials leads to a highlikelihood of successful early discontinuation of Rationale. Patients with sepsis-induced ARDS oftenmechanical ventilation. develop increased vascular permeability. Preclinical and early clinical data suggest that b-adrenergic agonists may10. We recommend against the routine use of the pul- speed resorption of alveolar edema . Two random- monary artery catheter for patients with sepsis- ized clinical trials studied the effect of b-agonists in induced ARDS (grade 1A). patients with ARDS [301, 302]. In one, a comparison of aerosolized albuterol and placebo in 282 patients withRationale. Although insertion of a pulmonary artery ARDS, the trial was stopped for futility . Patients(PA) catheter may provide useful information on a receiving albuterol had higher heart rates on day 2, and apatient’s volume status and cardiac function, these bene- trend was detected toward decreased ventilator-free daysﬁts may be confounded by differences in the (days alive and off the ventilator). The rates of deathinterpretation of results [285–287], lack of correlation of before discharge were 23.0 % in the albuterol groupPA occlusion pressures with clinical response , and versus 17.7 % in placebo-treated patients. More than halfan absence of a proven strategy to use catheter results to of the patients enrolled in this trial had pulmonary orimprove patient outcomes . Two multicenter ran- nonpulmonary sepsis as the cause of the ARDS .domized trials, one in patients with shock or ARDS  The use of intravenous salbutamol was tested in theand the other in those with only ARDS , failed to BALTI-2 trial . Three hundred twenty-six patientsshow beneﬁt with the routine use of PA catheters in with ARDS, 251 of whom had pulmonary or nonpulmo-ARDS. In addition, other studies in different types of nary sepsis as cause, were randomized to intravenouscritically ill patients have failed to show deﬁnitive beneﬁt salbutatmol, 15 lg/kg of ideal body weight, or placebowith routine use of the PA catheter [291–293]. Well- for up to 7 days. Patients treated with salbutamol hadselected patients remain appropriate candidates for PA increased 28-day mortality rates (34 vs. 23 %; RR, 1.4;catheter insertion only when the answers to important 95 % CI, 1.03–2.08) leading to early termination of themanagement decisions depend on information solely trial .obtainable from direct measurements made within the PA b2-agonists may have speciﬁc indications, such as[292, 294]. treatment of bronchospasm and hyperkalemia. In the absence of these conditions, we recommend against the11. We recommend a conservative ﬂuid strategy for routine use of b-agonists, either in intravenous or aero- patients with established sepsis-induced ARDS who do solized form, for the treatment of patients with sepsis- not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (grade 1C). induced ARDS.Rationale. Mechanisms for the development of pul-monary edema in patients with ARDS include increased P. Sedation, analgesia, and neuromuscular blockadecapillary permeability, increased hydrostatic pressure, and in sepsisdecreased oncotic pressure . Small prospectivestudies in patients with critical illness and ARDS 1. We recommend that either continuous or intermittenthave suggested that low weight gain is associated with sedation be minimized in mechanically ventilated sepsisimproved oxygenation  and fewer days of mechanical patients, targeting speciﬁc titration endpoints (grade 1B).
192Rationale. A growing body of evidence indicates that mechanical ventilation or lengths of stay between thelimiting the use of sedation in critically ill ventilated groups; and daily interruption was associated with higherpatients can reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation daily opioid and benzodiazepines doses, as well as higherand ICU and hospital lengths of stay [303–305]. While nurse workload. Additionally, a randomized prospectivestudies limiting sedation have been performed in a wide blinded observational study demonstrated that althoughrange of critically ill patients, there is little reason to myocardial ischemia is common in critically ill ventilatedassume that septic patients will not derive beneﬁt from patients, daily sedative interruption is not associated withthis approach . The use of protocols for sedation is an increased occurrence of myocardial ischemia .one method to limit sedation use, and a randomized, Regardless of sedation approach, early physical rehabili-controlled clinical trial found that protocolized sedation tation should be a goal .compared with usual care reduced duration of mechanicalventilation, lengths of stay, and tracheostomy rates . 2. We recommend that NMBAs be avoided if possible inAvoidance of sedation is another strategy. A recent the septic patient without ARDS due to the risk ofobservational study of 250 critically ill patients suggests prolonged neuromuscular blockade following discon-that deep sedation is common in mechanically ventilated tinuation. If NMBAs must be maintained, eitherpatients . A randomized, controlled clinical trial intermittent bolus as required or continuous infusionfound that patients treated with intravenous morphine with train-of-four monitoring of the depth of blockadeboluses preferentially, had signiﬁcantly more days with- should be used (grade 1C).out ventilation, shorter stay in ICU and hospital, than 3. We suggest a short course of an NMBA (B48 h) forpatients who received sedation (propofol and midazolam) patients with early, sepsis-induced ARDS and PaO2/in addition to morphine . However, agitated delirium FIO2 150 mm Hg (grade 2C).was more frequently detected in the intervention group.Although not speciﬁcally studied in patients with sepsis, Rationale. Although NMBAs are often administered tothe administration of intermittent sedation, daily sedative critically ill patients, their role in the ICU is not well deﬁned.interruption, and systematic titration to a predeﬁned No evidence exists that neuromuscular blockade in thisendpoint have been demonstrated to decrease the duration patient population reduces mortality or major morbidity. Inof mechanical ventilation [284, 305, 308, 309]. Patients addition, no studies have been published that speciﬁcallyreceiving neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) must address the use of NMBAs in septic patients.be individually assessed regarding discontinuation of The most common indication for NMBA use in thesedative drugs because the neuromuscular blockade must ICU is to facilitate mechanical ventilation . Whenﬁrst be reversed. The use of intermittent vs. continuous appropriately used, these agents may improve chest wallmethods for the delivery of sedation in critically ill compliance, prevent respiratory dyssynchrony, andpatients has been examined in an observational study of reduce peak airway pressures . Muscle paralysis maymechanically ventilated patients that showed that patients also reduce oxygen consumption by decreasing the workreceiving continuous sedation had signiﬁcantly longer of breathing and respiratory muscle blood ﬂow .durations of mechanical ventilation and ICU and hospital However, a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical triallengths of stay . in patients with severe sepsis demonstrated that oxygen Clinical trials have evaluated daily interruption of delivery, oxygen consumption, and gastric intramucosalcontinuous sedative infusions. A prospective, randomized pH were not improved during deep neuromuscularcontrolled trial in 128 mechanically ventilated adults blockade .receiving continuous intravenous sedation demonstrated A recent randomized clinical trial of continuousthat a daily interruption in the continuous sedative infu- infusions of cisatracurium in patients with early ARDSsion until the patient was awake decreased the duration of and a PaO2/FIO2 150 mm Hg showed improved adjus-mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay . ted survival rates and more organ failure-free daysAlthough the patients did receive continuous sedative without an increased risk in ICU-acquired weaknessinfusions in this study, the daily interruption and awak- compared with placebo-treated patients . Theening allowed for titration of sedation, in effect making investigators used a high ﬁxed dose of cisatracuriumthe dosing intermittent. In addition, a paired spontaneous without train-of-four monitoring, and half of the patientsawakening trial combined with a spontaneous breathing in the placebo group received at least a single dose oftrial decreased the duration of mechanical ventilation, NMBA. Whether another NMBA would have similarlength of ICU and hospital stay, and 1-year mortality effects is unknown. Although many of the patients. More recently, a multicenter randomized trial enrolled into this trial appeared to meet sepsis criteria, itcompared protocolized sedation with protocolized seda- is not clear whether similar results would occur in sepsistion plus daily sedation interruption in 423 critically ill patients. A GRADEpro Summary of Evidence Tablemechanically ventilated medical and surgical patients regarding use of NMBA in ARDS appears in Supple-. There were no differences in duration of mental Digital Content 5.
193 An association between NMBA use and myopathies length of stay of more than 3 days in three medical ICUsand neuropathies has been suggested by case studies and and overall mortality was not reduced .prospective observational studies in the critical care Since these studies [326, 327] and the previous Sur-population [315, 319–322], but the mechanisms by which viving Sepsis Guidelines  appeared, several RCTsNMBAs produce or contribute to myopathies and neur- [128, 328–332] and meta-analyses [333– 337] of intensiveopathies in these patients are unknown. Although no insulin therapy have been performed. The RCTs studiedstudies are speciﬁc to the septic patient population, it mixed populations of surgical and medical ICU patientsseems clinically prudent, based on existing knowledge, [128, 328–332] and found that intensive insulin therapythat NMBAs not be administered unless there is a clear did not signiﬁcantly decrease mortality [128, 328–332],indication for neuromuscular blockade that cannot be whereas the NICE-SUGAR trial demonstrated ansafely achieved with appropriate sedation and analgesia increased mortality . All studies [128, 326–332]. reported a much higher incidence of severe hypoglycemia Only one prospective RCT has compared peripheral (glucose B40 mg/dL) (6–29 %) with intensive insulinnerve stimulation and standard clinical assessment in ICU therapy. Several meta-analyses conﬁrmed that intensivepatients . Rudis et al. randomized 77 critically ill insulin therapy was not associated with a mortality beneﬁtICU patients requiring neuromuscular blockade to receive in surgical, medical, or mixed ICU patients [333, 335,dosing of vecuronium based on train-of-four stimulation 337]. The meta-analysis by Griesdale and colleaguesor on clinical assessment (control group). The peripheral , using between-trial comparisons driven mainly bynerve stimulation group received less drug and recovered the 2001 study by van den Berghe et al. , found thatneuromuscular function and spontaneous ventilation fas- intensive insulin therapy was beneﬁcial in surgical ICUter than the control group. Nonrandomized observational patients [risk ratio 0.63 (0.44–0.9)], whereas the meta-studies have suggested that peripheral nerve monitoring analysis by Friedrich et al. , using within-trialreduces or has no effect on clinical recovery from comparisons, showed no beneﬁt for surgical patients inNMBAs in the ICU [324, 325]. mixed medical-surgical ICUs [risk ratio 0.99 (0.82–1.11)] Beneﬁts to neuromuscular monitoring, including faster and no subgroup of surgical patients who beneﬁted fromrecovery of neuromuscular function and shorter intuba- intensive insulin therapy. Interestingly, the RCTs thattion times, appear to exist. A potential for cost savings reported [326, 337] compared intensive insulin therapy to(reduced total dose of NMBAs and shorter intubation high controls (180–200 mg/dL) [OR 0.89 (0.73–1.09)],times) also may exist, although this has not been studied whereas those that did not demonstrate beneﬁt [330–332]formally. compared intensive therapy to moderate controls (108–180 mg/dL) [OR 1.14 (1.02 to -1.26)]. See Sup- plemental Digital Content 6 for details.Q. Glucose control The trigger to start an insulin protocol for blood glu-1. We recommend a protocolized approach to blood cose levels [180 mg/dL with an upper target blood glucose management in ICU patients with severe glucose level 180 mg/dL derives from the NICE- sepsis, commencing insulin dosing when two consec- SUGAR study , which used these values for initi- utive blood glucose levels are [180 mg/dL. This ating and stopping therapy. The NICE-SUGAR trial is the approach should target an upper blood glucose level largest, most compelling study to date on glucose control B180 mg/dL rather than an upper target blood glucose in ICU patients given its inclusion of multiple ICUs and B110 mg/dL (grade 1A). hospitals and a general patient population. Several med-2. We recommend blood glucose values be monitored ical organizations, including the American Association of every 1–2 h until glucose values and insulin infusion Clinical Endocrinologists, American Diabetes Associa- rates are stable, then every 4 h thereafter (grade 1C). tion, American Heart Association, American College of3. We recommend that glucose levels obtained with Physicians, and Society of Critical Care Medicine, have point-of-care testing of capillary blood be interpreted published consensus statements for glycemic control of with caution, as such measurements may not accu- hospitalized patients [338–341]. These statements usually rately estimate arterial blood or plasma glucose values targeted glucose levels between 140 and 180 mg/dL. As (UG). there is no evidence that targets between 140 and 180 mg/ dL are different from targets of 110–140 mg/dL, theRationale. One large RCT single center trial in a pre- recommendations use an upper target blood glucosedominantly cardiac surgical ICU demonstrated a B180 mg/dL without a lower target other than hypogly-reduction in ICU mortality with intensive intravenous cemia. Treatment should avoid hyperglycemia ([180 mg/insulin (Leuven protocol) targeting blood glucose to dL), hypoglycemia, and wide swings in glucose levels.80–110 mg/dL . A second randomized trial of The continuation of insulin infusions, especially with theintensive insulin therapy using the Leuven protocol cessation of nutrition, has been identiﬁed as a risk factorenrolled medical ICU patients with an anticipated ICU for hypoglycemia . Balanced nutrition may be
194associated with a reduced risk of hypoglycemia . analyses [365, 366] reported the absence of signiﬁcantSeveral studies have suggested that the variability in difference in hospital mortality between patients whoglucose levels over time is an important determinant of receive continuous and intermittent renal replacementmortality [343–345]. Hyperglycemia and glucose vari- therapies. This absence of apparent beneﬁt of oneability seem to be unassociated with increased mortality modality over the other persists even when the analysisrates in diabetic patients compared to nondiabetic patients is restricted to RCT studies . To date, ﬁve pro-[346, 347]. spective RCTs have been published [367–371]; four Several factors may affect the accuracy and repro- found no signiﬁcant difference in mortality [367–371],ducibility of point-of-care testing of blood capillary blood whereas one found signiﬁcantly higher mortality in theglucose, including the type and model of the device used, continuous treatment group , but imbalanced ran-user expertise, and patient factors, including hematocrit domization had led to a higher baseline severity of(false elevation with anemia), PaO2, and drugs . illness in this group. When a multivariable model wasPlasma glucose values by capillary point-of-care testing used to adjust for severity of illness, no difference inhave been found to be inaccurate with frequent false mortality was apparent between the groups . Mostelevations  over the range of glucose levels , studies comparing modes of renal replacement in thebut especially in the hypoglycemic [349, 351] and critically ill have included a small number of patientshyperglycemic ranges  and in hypotensive patients and some major weaknesses (i.e., randomization failure, or patients receiving catecholamines . A modiﬁcations of therapeutic protocol during the studyreview of 12 published insulin infusion protocols for period, combination of different types of continuouscritically ill patients showed wide variability in dose renal replacement therapies, small number of heteroge-recommendations and variable glucose control . This neous groups of enrollees). The most recent and largestlack of consensus about optimal dosing of intravenous RCT  enrolled 360 patients and found no signiﬁcantinsulin may reﬂect variability in patient factors (severity difference in survival between the continuous andof illness, surgical vs medical settings), or practice pat- intermittent groups. Moreover, no evidence supports theterns (e.g., approaches to feeding, intravenous dextrose) use of continuous therapies in sepsis independent ofin the environments in which these protocols were renal replacement needs.developed and tested. Alternatively, some protocols may No evidence supports a better tolerance with contin-be more effective than others, conclusion supported by uous treatments regarding the hemodynamic tolerance ofthe wide variability in hypoglycemia rates reported with each method. Two prospective studies [369, 372] haveprotocols [128, 326–333]. Thus, the use of established reported a better hemodynamic tolerance with continuousinsulin protocols is important not only for clinical care but treatment, with no improvement in regional perfusionalso for the conduct of clinical trials to avoid hypogly-  and no survival beneﬁt . Four other prospec-cemia, adverse events, and premature termination of trials tive studies did not ﬁnd any signiﬁcant difference in MAPbefore the efﬁcacy signal, if any, can be determined. or drop in systolic pressure between the two methodsSeveral studies have suggested that computer-based [368, 370, 371, 373]. Two studies reported a signiﬁcantalgorithms result in tighter glycemic control with a improvement in goal achievement with continuousreduced risk of hypoglycemia [355, 356]. Further study of methods [367, 369] regarding ﬂuid balance management.validated, safe, and effective protocols for controlling In summary, the evidence is insufﬁcient to draw strongblood glucose concentrations and variability in the severe conclusions regarding the mode of replacement therapysepsis population is needed. for acute renal failure in septic patients. The effect of dose of continuous renal replacement on outcomes in patients with acute renal failure has shownR. Renal replacement therapy mixed results [374, 375]. None of these trials was con-1. We suggest that continuous renal replacement thera- ducted speciﬁcally in patients with sepsis. Although the pies and intermittent hemodialysis are equivalent in weight of evidence suggests that higher doses of renal patients with severe sepsis and acute renal failure replacement may be associated with improved outcomes, because they achieve similar short-term survival rates these results may not be generalizable. Two large multi- (grade 2B). center randomized trials comparing the dose of renal2. We suggest the use of continuous therapies to facilitate replacement (Acute Renal Failure Trial Network in the management of ﬂuid balance in hemodynamically United States and RENAL Renal Replacement Therapy unstable septic patients (grade 2D). Study in Australia and New Zealand) failed to show beneﬁt of more aggressive renal replacement dosing [376,Rationale. Although numerous nonrandomized studies 377]. A typical dose for continuous renal replacementhave reported a nonsigniﬁcant trend toward improved therapy would be 20–25 mL kg-1 h-1 of efﬂuentsurvival using continuous methods [357–364], two meta- generation.
195S. Bicarbonate therapy Rationale. ICU patients are at risk for deep vein1. We recommend against the use of sodium bicarbonate thrombosis (DVT) . It is logical that patients with therapy for the purpose of improving hemodynamics severe sepsis would be at a similar or higher risk than the or reducing vasopressor requirements in patients with general ICU population. The consequences of VTE in the hypoperfusion-induced lactic acidemia with pH C7.15 setting of sepsis (increased risk of potentially fatal pul- (grade 2B). monary emboli in an already hemodynamically compromised patient) are dire. Therefore, prevention ofRationale. Although bicarbonate therapy may be useful VTE is highly desirable, especially if it can be done safelyin limiting tidal volume in ARDS in some situations of and effectively.permissive hypercapnia (see ‘‘Mechanical ventilation’’ Prophylaxis is generally effective. In particular, nineof ARDS), no evidence supports the use of bicarbonate placebo-controlled RCTs of VTE prophylaxis have beentherapy in the treatment of hypoperfusion-induced lactic conducted in general populations of acutely ill patientsacidemia associated with sepsis. Two blinded, crossover [381–389]. All trials showed reduction in DVT or pul-RCTs that compared equimolar saline and bicarbonate monary embolism, a beneﬁt that is also supported byin patients with lactic acidosis failed to reveal any dif- meta-analyses [390, 391]. Thus, the evidence stronglyference in hemodynamic variables or vasopressor supports the value of VTE prophylaxis (grade 1A). Therequirements [378, 379]. The number of patients with prevalence of infection/sepsis was 17 % in those studies7.15 pH in these studies was small. Bicarbonate in which this could be ascertained. One study investigatedadministration has been associated with sodium and only ICU patients only, and 52 % of those enrolled hadﬂuid overload, an increase in lactate and PCO2, and a infection/sepsis. The need to extrapolate from general,decrease in serum ionized calcium, but the relevance of acutely ill patients to critically ill patients to septicthese variables to outcome is uncertain. The effect of patients downgrades the evidence. That the effect isbicarbonate administration on hemodynamics and pronounced and the data are robust somewhat mitigatevasopressor requirements at lower pH, as well as the against the extrapolation, leading to a grade B determi-effect on clinical outcomes at any pH, is unknown. No nation. Because the patient’s risk of administration isstudies have examined the effect of bicarbonate small, the gravity of not administering may be great, andadministration on outcomes. the cost is low, the strength of the recommendation is strong . Deciding how to provide prophylaxis is decidedlyT. Deep vein thrombosis prophylaxis more difﬁcult. The Canadian Critical Care Trials Group compared UFH (5000 IU twice daily) to LMWH (dal-1. We recommend that patients with severe sepsis receive teparin, 5000 IU once per day and a second placebo daily pharmacoprophylaxis against venous thrombo- injection to ensure parallel-group equivalence) . No embolism (VTE) (grade 1B). We recommend that this statistically signiﬁcant difference in asymptomatic DVTs be accomplished with daily subcutaneous low-molec- was found between the two groups (hazard ratio, 0.92; ular weight heparin (LMWH) (grade 1B versus 95 % CI, 0.68–1.23; P = 0.57), but the proportion of unfractionated heparin [UFH] twice daily and grade patients diagnosed with pulmonary embolism on CT scan, 2C versus UFH given thrice daily). If creatinine high-probability ventilation perfusion scan, or autopsy clearance is 30 mL/min we recommend use of dal- was signiﬁcantly lower in the LMWH group (hazard ratio, teparin (grade 1A) or another form of LMWH that has 0.51; 95 % CI, 0.30–0.88; P = 0.01).The study did not a low degree of renal metabolism (grade 2C) or UFH account for the use of other forms of LMWH. These data (grade 1A). suggest that LMWH (dalteparin) is the treatment of2. We suggest that patients with severe sepsis be treated choice over UFH administered twice daily in critically ill with a combination of pharmacologic therapy and patients. Also, because the study included septic patients, intermittent pneumatic compression devices whenever the evidence supporting the use of dalteparin over twice possible (grade 2C). daily UFH in critically ill, and perhaps septic, patients is3. We recommend that septic patients who have a strong. Similarly, a meta-analysis of acutely ill, general contraindication to heparin use (e.g., thrombocytope- medical patients comparing UFH twice and thrice daily nia, severe coagulopathy, active bleeding, recent demonstrated that the latter regimen was more effective at intracerebral hemorrhage) not receive pharmacopro- preventing VTE, but twice daily dosing produced less phylaxis (grade 1B). Rather we suggest they receive bleeding . Both critically ill and septic patients were mechanical prophylactic treatment, such as graduated included in these analyses, but their numbers are unclear. compression stockings or intermittent compression Nonetheless, the quality of evidence supporting the use of devices (grade 2C), unless contraindicated. When the three times daily, as opposed to twice daily, UFH dosing risk decreases, we suggest starting pharmacoprophy- in preventing VTE in acutely ill medical patients is high laxis (grade 2C). (A). However, comparing LMWH to twice daily UFH, or
196twice daily UFH to three times daily UFH, in sepsis 2. When stress ulcer prophylaxis is used, we suggest therequires extrapolation, downgrading the data. No data use of proton pump inhibitors rather than H2 receptorexist on direct comparison of LMWH to UFH adminis- antagonists (H2RA) (grade 2C).tered three times daily, nor are there any studies directly 3. We suggest that patients without risk factors shouldcomparing twice daily and thrice daily UFH dosing in not receive prophylaxis (grade 2B).septic or critically ill patients. Therefore, it is not possibleto state that LMWH is superior to three times daily UFH Rationale. Although no study has been performed spe-or that three times daily dosing is superior to twice daily ciﬁcally in patients with severe sepsis, trials conﬁrmingadministration in sepsis. This downgrades the quality of the beneﬁt of stress ulcer prophylaxis in reducing upperthe evidence and therefore the recommendation. gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in general ICU populations Douketis et al.  conducted a study of 120 criti- included 20–25 % of patients with sepsis [403–406]. Thiscally ill patients with acute kidney injury (creatinine beneﬁt should be applicable to patients with severe sepsisclearance 30 mL/min) who received VTE prophylaxis and septic shock. In addition, the risk factors for GIwith dalteparin 5,000 IU daily for between 4 and 14 days bleeding (e.g., coagulopathy, mechanical ventilation for atand had at least one trough anti-factor Xa level measured. least 48 h, possibly hypotension) are frequently present inNone of the patients had bio-accumulation (trough anti- patients with severe sepsis and septic shock [407, 408].factor Xa level lower than 0.06 IU/mL). The incidence of Patients without these risk factors are unlikely (0.2 %;major bleeding was somewhat higher than in trials of 95 % CI, 0.02–0.5) to have clinically important bleedingother agents, but most other studies did not involve crit- .ically ill patients, in whom the bleeding risk is higher. Both old and new meta-analyses show prophylaxis-Further, bleeding did not correlate with detectable trough induced reduction in clinically signiﬁcant upper GIlevels . Therefore, we recommend that dalteparin bleeding, which we consider signiﬁcant even in thecan be administered to critically ill patients with acute absence of proven mortality beneﬁt [409–411]. The ben-renal failure (A). Data on other LMWHs are lacking. eﬁt of prevention of upper GI bleeding must be weighedConsequently, these forms should probably be avoided or, against the potential (unproven) effect of increasedif used, anti-factor Xa levels should be monitored (grade stomach pH on a greater incidence of VAP and C. difﬁcile2C). UFH is not renally cleared and is safe (grade 1A). infection [409, 412, 413]. (See Supplemental Digital Mechanical methods (intermittent compression Content 6, 7 and 8, Summary of Evidence Tables fordevices and graduated compression stockings) are rec- effects of treatments on speciﬁc outcomes.) In anommended when anticoagulation is contraindicated [395– exploratory hypothesis, we considered (as did the authors397]. A meta-analysis of 11 studies, including six RCTs, of the meta-analysis)  the possibility of less beneﬁtpublished in the Cochrane Library concluded that the and more harm in prophylaxis among patients receivingcombination of pharmacologic and mechanical prophy- enteral nutrition but decided to provide one recommen-laxis was superior to either modality alone in preventing dation while lowering the quality of evidence. TheDVT and was better than compression alone in preventing balance of beneﬁts and risks may thus depend on thepulmonary embolism . This analysis did not focus on individual patient’s characteristics as well as on the localsepsis or critically ill patients but included studies of epidemiology of VAP and C. difﬁcile infections. Theprophylaxis after orthopedic, pelvic, and cardiac surgery. rationale for considering only suppression of acid pro-In addition, the type of pharmacologic prophylaxis varied, duction (and not sucralfate) is based on the study of 1,200including UFH, LMWH, aspirin, and warfarin. Nonethe- patients by Cook et al.  comparing H2 blockers andless, the minimal risk associated with compression sucralfate. More recent meta-analyses provide low-qualitydevices lead us to recommend combination therapy in evidence suggesting more effective GI bleeding protec-most cases. In very-high-risk patients, LMWH is pre- tion with the use of proton pump inhibitors than withferred over UFH [392, 399–401]. Patients receiving H2RA [415–417]. Patients should be periodically evalu-heparin should be monitored for development of heparin- ated for the continued need for prophylaxis.induced thrombocytopenia. These recommendations areconsistent with those developed by the American Collegeof Chest Physicians . V. Nutrition 1. We suggest administering oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either completeU. Stress ulcer prophylaxis fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within1. We recommend that stress ulcer prophylaxis using H2 the ﬁrst 48 h after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic blocker or proton pump inhibitor be given to patients shock (grade 2C). with severe sepsis/septic shock who have bleeding risk 2. We suggest avoiding mandatory full caloric feeding in factors (grade 1B). the ﬁrst week, but rather suggest low dose feeding
197 (e.g., up to 500 kcal per day), advancing only as Underfeeding/trophic feeding strategies did not exclude tolerated (grade 2B). advancing diet as tolerated in those who improved3. We suggest using intravenous glucose and enteral quickly. nutrition rather than TPN alone or parenteral nutrition Some form of parenteral nutrition has been compared in conjunction with enteral feeding in the ﬁrst 7 days to alternative feeding strategies (e.g., fasting or enteral after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (grade nutrition) in well over 50 studies, although only one 2B). exclusively studied sepsis , and eight meta-analyses4. We suggest using nutrition with no speciﬁc immuno- have been published [429, 437–443]. Two of the meta- modulating supplementation in patients with severe analyses summarize comparisons of parenteral nutrition sepsis (grade 2C). versus fasting or intravenous glucose [437, 438], and 6 look at parenteral versus enteral nutrition [429, 439–443],Rationale. Early enteral nutrition has theoretical two of which attempted to explore the effect of earlyadvantages in the integrity of gut mucosa and prevention enteral nutrition [441, 442]. Recently, a study much largerof bacterial translocation and organ dysfunction, but also than most earlier nutrition trials compared ICU patientsconcerning is the risk of ischemia, mainly in hemody- randomized to early use of parenteral nutrition to augmentnamically unstable patients. enteral feeding versus enteral feeding with only late ini- Unfortunately, no clinical trial has speciﬁcally tiation of parenteral nutrition if necessary .addressed early feeding in septic patients. Studies on No direct evidence supports the beneﬁts or harm ofdifferent subpopulations of critically ill patients, mostly parenteral nutrition in the ﬁrst 48 h in sepsis. Rather, thesurgical patients, are not consistent, with great variability evidence is generated predominantly from surgical, burn,in the intervention and control groups; all are of low and trauma patients. None of the meta-analyses reports amethodological quality [418–427] and none was indi- mortality beneﬁt with parenteral nutrition, except onevidually powered for mortality, with very low mortality suggesting parenteral nutrition may be better than laterates [418–420, 423, 426]. Authors of previously pub- introduction of enteral nutrition . Several suggestedlished meta-analyses of optimal nutrition strategies for the that parenteral nutrition had higher infectious complica-critically ill all reported that the studies they included had tions compared both to fasting or intravenous glucose andhigh heterogeneity and low quality [418–430]. Although to enteral nutrition [429, 431, 438, 439, 442]. Enteralno consistent effect on mortality was observed, there was feeding was associated with a higher rate of enteralevidence of beneﬁt from some early enteral feeding on complications (e.g., diarrhea) than parenteral nutritionsecondary outcomes, such as reduced incidence of . The use of parenteral nutrition to supplement ent-infectious complications [418, 422, 426, 427–430], eral feeding was also analyzed by Dhaliwal et al. ,reduced length of mechanical ventilation [421, 427], and who also reported no beneﬁt. The trial by Casaer et al.reduced ICU [421, 427] and hospital stays . No  reported that early initiation of parenteral nutritionevidence of harm was demonstrated in any of those led to longer hospital and ICU stays, longer duration ofstudies. Therefore, there is insufﬁcient evidence to issue a organ support, and higher incidence of ICU-acquiredstrong recommendation, but the suggestion of beneﬁt and infection. One-ﬁfth of patients had sepsis and there wasabsence of harm supports a suggestion that some enteral no evidence of heterogeneity in treatment effects acrossfeeding is warranted. subgroups, including the sepsis subjects. Therefore, no Studies comparing full caloric early enteral feeding to studies suggest the superiority of TPN over enteral alonelower targets in the critically ill have produced incon- in the ﬁrst 24 h. In fact, there is a suggestion that enteralclusive results. In four studies, no effect on mortality was nutrition may in fact be superior to TPN vis a vis infec-seen [431–434]; one reported fewer infectious complica- tious complications and possibly requirement fortions , and the others reported increased diarrhea and intensive care and organ support.gastric residuals [433, 434] and increased incidence of Immune system function can be modiﬁed throughinfectious complications with full caloric feeding . alterations in the supply of certain nutrients, such asIn another study, mortality was greater with higher arginine, glutamine, or omega-3 fatty acids. Numerousfeeding, but differences in feeding strategies were modest studies have assessed whether use of these agents asand the sample size was small . Therefore, evidence nutritional supplements can affect the course of criticalis insufﬁcient to support an early target of full caloric illness, but few speciﬁcally addressed their early use inintake and, indeed, some possibility of harm exists. sepsis. Four meta-analyses evaluated immune-enhancingUnderfeeding (60–70 % of target) or trophic feeding nutrition and found no difference in mortality, neither in(upper limit of 500 kcal) is probably a better nutritional surgical nor medical patients [445–448]. However, theystrategy in the ﬁrst week of severe sepsis/septic shock. analyzed all studies together, regardless of the immuno-This upper limit for trophic feeding is a somewhat arbi- component used, which could have compromised theirtrary number, but based in part on the fact that the two conclusions. Other individual studies analyzed diets withrecent studies used a range of 240–480 kcal [433, 434]. a mix of arginine, glutamine, antioxidants, and/or omega-
1983 with negative results [449, 450] including a small study arachidonic acid-derived equivalents, reducing the pro-in septic patients showing a non-signiﬁcant increase in inﬂammatory impact on the immune response [452, 453].ICU mortality [451, 452]. Three early studies were summarized in a meta-analysis Arginine. Arginine availability is reduced in sepsis, that reported a signiﬁcant mortality reduction, increasedwhich can lead to reduced nitric oxide synthesis, loss of ventilator-free days, and reduced risk of new organ dys-microcirculatory regulation, and enhanced production of function . However, only one study was in septicsuperoxide and peroxynitrite. However, arginine supple- patients , none was individually powered for mor-mentation could lead to unwanted vasodilation and tality [472, 473], and all three used a diet with highhypotension [452, 453]. Human trials of L-arginine sup- omega-6 lipid content in the control group, which is notplementation have generally been small and reported the usual standard of care in the critically ill. The authorsvariable effects on mortality [454–457]. The only study in who ﬁrst reported reduced mortality in sepsis  con-septic patients showed improved survival, but had limi- ducted a follow-up multicenter study and again foundtations in study design . Other studies suggested no improvement in nonmortality outcomes, though notablybeneﬁt [449, 454, 455] or possible harm  in the with no demonstrable effect on mortality . Othersubgroup of septic patients. Some authors found studies using enteral [475–477] or parenteral [478–480]improvement in secondary outcomes in septic patients, ﬁsh oil failed to conﬁrm these ﬁndings in general criticalsuch as reduced infectious complications [454, 455] and illness or acute lung injury. Thus, no large, reproduciblelength of hospital stay , but the relevance of these ﬁndings suggest a clear beneﬁt in the use of immuno-ﬁndings in the face of potential harm is unclear. modulating nutritional supplements in sepsis, though Glutamine. Glutamine levels are also reduced during larger trials are ongoing.critical illness. Exogenous supplementation can improvegut mucosal atrophy and permeability, possibly leading toreduced bacterial translocation. Other potential beneﬁts W. Setting goals of careare enhanced immune cell function, decreased pro-inﬂammatory cytokine production, and higher levels of 1. We recommend that goals of care and prognosis beglutathione and antioxidative capacity [452, 453]. How- discussed with patients and families (grade 1B).ever, the clinical signiﬁcance of these ﬁndings is not 2. We recommend that the goals of care be incorporatedclearly established. into treatment and end-of-life care planning, utilizing Although a previous meta-analysis showed mortality palliative care principles where appropriate (grade 1B).reduction , four other meta-analyses did not [458– 3. We suggest that goals of care be addressed as early as462]. Other small studies not included in those meta- feasible, but no later than within 72 h of ICU admissionanalyses had similar results [463, 464]. Three recent well- (grade 2C).designed studies also failed to show a mortality beneﬁt inthe primary analyses [227, 465, 466], but again, none Rationale. The majority of ICU patients receive fullfocused speciﬁcally on septic patients. Two small studies support with aggressive, life-sustaining treatments. Manyon septic patients showed no beneﬁt in mortality rates patients with multiple organ system failure or severe neu-[467, 468] but a signiﬁcant reduction in infectious com- rologic injuries will not survive or will have a poor quality ofplications  and a faster recovery of organ life. Decisions to provide less-aggressive life-sustainingdysfunction . Some previous individual studies and treatments or to withdraw life-sustaining treatments in thesemeta-analyses showed positive secondary outcomes, such patients may be in the patient’s best interest and may be whatas reduction in infectious morbidity [461, 462, 465] and patients and their families desire . Physicians haveorgan dysfunction . Beneﬁcial effects were found different end-of-life practices based on their region ofmostly in trials using parenteral rather than enteral glu- practice, culture, and religion . Although the outcometamine. However, recent and well-sized studies could not of intensive care treatment in critically ill patients may bedemonstrate a reduction of infectious complications  difﬁcult to prognosticate accurately, establishing realisticor organ dysfunction [465, 466], even with parenteral treatment goals is important in promoting patient-centeredglutamine. An ongoing trial (REDOXS) of 1,200 patients care in the ICU . Models for structuring initiatives towill test both enteral and parenteral glutamine and anti- enhance care in the ICU highlight the importance of incor-oxidant supplementation in critically ill, mechanically porating goals of care along with the prognosis intoventilated patients . Although no clear beneﬁt could treatment plans . Additionally, discussing the prog-be demonstrated in clinical trials with supplemental glu- nosis for achieving the goals of care and level of certainty oftamine, there is no sign of harm. prognosis has been identiﬁed as an important component of The omega-3 fatty acids eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) surrogate decision-making in the ICU [485, 486]. However,and gamma-linolenic acid (GLA) are eicosanoid precur- variations exist in the use of advanced care planning andsors. The prostaglandins, leukotrienes, and thromboxanes integration of palliative and end-of-life care in the ICU,produced from EPA/GLA are less potent than their which can lead to conﬂicts that may threaten overall quality
199of care [487, 488]. The use of proactive family care con- require early intubation; however, during intubation andferences to identify advanced directives and treatment mechanical ventilation, increased intrathoracic pressuregoals within 72 h of ICU admission promotes communi- can reduce venous return and lead to worsening shock ifcation and understanding between the patient’s family and the patient is not volume loaded. In those who desaturatethe care team; improves family satisfaction; decreases despite administration of face mask oxygen, high-ﬂowstress, anxiety, and depression in surviving relatives; nasal cannula oxygen or nasopharyngeal CPAP can befacilitates end-of-life decision making; and shortens used to increase functional residual capacity and reducelength of stay for patients who die in the ICU [489–494]. the work of breathing, allowing for establishment ofClinical practice guidelines for support of the ICU patient intravenous or intraosseous access for ﬂuid resuscitationand family promote: early and repeated care conferencing and peripheral inotrope delivery [502, 503]. Drugs usedto reduce family stress and improve consistency in com- for sedation have important side effects in these patients.munication; open ﬂexible visitation; family presence For example, etomidate is associated with increasedduring clinical rounds and resuscitation; and attention to mortality in children with meningococcal sepsis becausecultural and spiritual support . Additionally, the of adrenal suppression effect [504, 505]. Becauseintegration of advanced care planning and palliative care attainment of central access is more difﬁcult in childrenfocused on pain management, symptom control, and than adults, reliance on peripheral or intraosseous accessfamily support has been shown to improve symptom can be substituted until and unless central access ismanagement and patient comfort, and to improve family available.communication [484, 490, 496]. 2. We suggest that the initial therapeutic endpoints ofPediatric considerations in severe sepsis (Table 9) resuscitation of septic shock be capillary reﬁll of B2 s, normal blood pressure for age, normal pulses with noWhile sepsis in children is a major cause of death in differential between peripheral and central pulses,industrialized countries with state-of-the-art ICUs, the warm extremities, urine output [1 mL kg-1 h-1, andoverall mortality from severe sepsis is much lower than normal mental status. Thereafter, ScvO2 saturationthat in adults, estimated at about 2–10 % [497–499]. The greater than or equal to 70 % and cardiac indexhospital mortality rate for severe sepsis is 2 % in previ- between 3.3 and 6.0 L min-1 m-2 should be targetedously healthy children and 8 % in chronically ill children (grade 2C).in the US . Deﬁnitions of sepsis, severe sepsis, septicshock, and multiple organ dysfunction/failure syndromes Rationale. Adult guidelines recommend lactate clear-are similar to adult deﬁnitions but depend on age-speciﬁc ance as well, but children commonly have normal lactateheart rate, respiratory rate, and white blood cell count levels with septic shock. Because of the many modalitiescutoff values [500, 501]. This document provides rec- used to measure ScvO2 and cardiac index, the speciﬁcommendations only for term newborns and children in the choice is left to the practitioner’s discretion [506–512].industrialized resource-rich setting with full access tomechanical ventilation ICUs. 3. We recommend following the American College of Critical Care Medicine-Pediatric Advanced Life Sup-A. Initial resuscitation port guidelines for the management of septic shock1. We suggest starting with oxygen administered by face (grade 1C). mask or, if needed and available, high-ﬂow nasal cannula oxygen or nasopharyngeal CPAP for respira- Rationale. The recommended guidelines are summa- tory distress and hypoxemia. Peripheral intravenous rized in Fig. 2 [510–512]. access or intraosseous access can be used for ﬂuid resuscitation and inotrope infusion when a central line is not available. If mechanical ventilation is required, 4. We recommend evaluating for and reversing pneumo- then cardiovascular instability during intubation is less thorax, pericardial tamponade, or endocrine emergencies likely after appropriate cardiovascular resuscitation in patients with refractory shock (grade 1C). (grade 2C). Rationale. Endocrine emergencies include hypoadre- nalism and hypothyroidism. In select patients, intra-Rationale. Due to low functional residual capacity, abdominal hypertension may also need to be consideredyoung infants and neonates with severe sepsis may [513–515].
200Table 9 Recommendations: special considerations in pediatricsA. Initial resuscitation1. For respiratory distress and hypoxemia start with face mask oxygen or if needed and available, high ﬂow nasal cannula oxygen or nasopharyngeal CPAP (NP CPAP). For improved circulation, peripheral intravenous access or intraosseus access can be used for ﬂuid resuscitation and inotrope infusion when a central line is not available. If mechanical ventilation is required then cardiovascular instability during intubation is less likely after appropriate cardiovascular resuscitation (grade 2C).2. Initial therapeutic end points of resuscitation of septic shock: capillary reﬁll of B2 s, normal blood pressure for age, normal pulses with no differential between peripheral and central pulses, warm extremities, urine output [1 mL kg-1 h-1, and normal mental status. ScvO2 saturation C70% and cardiac index between 3.3 and 6.0 L/min/m2 should be targeted thereafter (grade 2C).3. Follow American College of Critical Care Medicine-Pediatric Life Support ( ACCM-PALS) guidelines for the management of septic shock (grade 1C).4. Evaluate for and reverse pneumothorax, pericardial tamponade, or endocrine emergencies in patients with refractory shock (grade 1C).B. Antibiotics and source control1. Empiric antibiotics be administered within 1 hr of the identiﬁcation of severe sepsis. Blood cultures should be obtained before administering antibiotics when possible but this should not delay administration of antibiotics. The empiric drug choice should be changed as epidemic and endemic ecologies dictate (eg H1N1, MRSA, chloroquine resistant malaria, penicillin-resistant pneumococci,recent ICU stay, neutropenia) (grade 1D).2. Clindamycin and anti-toxin therapies for toxic shock syndromes with refractory hypotension (grade 2D).3. Early and aggressive source control (grade 1D).4. Clostridium difﬁcile colitis should be treated with enteral antibiotics if tolerated. Oral vancomycin is preferred for severe disease (grade 1A).C. Fluid resuscitation1. In the industrialized world with access to inotropes and mechanical ventilation, initial resuscitation of hypovolemic shock begins with infusion of isotonic crystalloids or albumin with boluses of up to 20 mL/kg crystalloids (or albumin equivalent ) over 5–10 minutes, titrated to reversing hypotension, increasing urine output, and attaining normal capillary reﬁll, peripheral pulses, and level of consciousness without inducing hepatomegaly or rales. If hepatomegaly or rales exist then inotropic support should be implemented, not ﬂuid resuscitation. In non-hypotensive children with severe hemolytic anemia (severe malaria or sickle cell crises) blood transfusion is considered superior to crystalloid or albumin bolusing (grade 2C).D. Inotropes/vasopressors/vasodilators1. Begin peripheral inotropic support until central venous access can be attained in children who are not responsive to ﬂuid resuscitation (grade 2C).2. Patients with low cardiac output and elevated systemic vascular resistance states with normal blood pressure be given vasodilator therapies in addition to inotropes (grade 2C).E. Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) 1. Consider ECMO for refractory pediatric septic shock and respiratory failure (grade 2C).F. Corticosteroids 1. Timely hydrocortisone therapy in children with ﬂuid refractory, catecholamine resistant shock and suspected or proven absolute (classic) adrenal insufﬁciency (grade 1 A) .G. Protein C and activated protein concentrateNo recommendation as no longer availableH. Blood products and plasma therapies1. Similar hemoglobin targets in children as in adults. During resuscitation of low superior vena cava oxygen saturation shock (70 %), hemoglobin levels of 10 g/dL are targeted. After stabilization and recovery from shock and hypoxemia then a lower target [7.0 g/dL can be considered reasonable (grade 1B).2. Similar platelet transfusion targets in children as in adults (grade 2C).3. Use plasma therapies in children to correct sepsis-induced thrombotic purpura disorders, including progressive disseminated intravascular coagulation, secondary thrombotic microangiopathy, and thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (grade 2C).I. Mechanical ventilation 1. Lung-protective strategies during mechanical ventilation (grade 2C).J. Sedation/analgesia/drug toxicities 1. We recommend use of sedation with a sedation goal in critically ill mechanically ventilated patients with sepsis (grade 1D). 2. Monitor drug toxicity labs because drug metabolism is reduced during severe sepsis, putting children at greater risk of adverse drug-related events (grade 1C).K. Glycemic control1. Control hyperglycemia using a similar target as in adults B180 mg/dL. Glucose infusion should accompany insulin therapy in newborns and children because some hyperglycemic children make no insulin whereas others are insulin resistant (grade 2C).L. Diuretics and renal replacement therapy 1. Use diuretics to reverse ﬂuid overload when shock has resolved, and if unsuccessful then continuous venovenous hemoﬁltration (CVVH) or intermittent dialysis to prevent [10 % total body weight ﬂuid overload (grade 2C).M. Deep vein thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxisNo recommendation on the use of DVT prophylaxis in prepubertal children with severe sepsis.N. Stress ulcer (SU) prophylaxisNo recommendation on the use of SU prophylaxis in prepubertal children with severe sepsisO. Nutrition1. Enteral nutrition given to children who can be fed enterally, and parenteral feeding in those who cannot (grade 2C).
201Fig. 2 Algorithm for time sensitive, goal-directed stepwise management of hemodynamic support in infants and children. Reproducedfrom B. Antibiotics and source control resistant malaria, penicillin-resistant pneumococci,1. We recommend that empiric antimicrobials be admin- recent ICU stay, neutropenia) (grade 1D). istered within 1 h of the identiﬁcation of severe sepsis. Blood cultures should be obtained before administering Rationale. Vascular access and blood drawing is antibiotics when possible, but this should not delay ini- more difﬁcult in newborns and children. Antimicro- tiation of antibiotics. The empiric drug choice should be bials can be given intramuscularly or orally (if changed as epidemic and endemic ecologies dictate (e.g., tolerated) until intravenous line access is available H1N1, methicillin-resistant S. aureus, chloroquine- [516–519].
2022. We suggest the use of clindamycin and antitoxin transfusion is considered superior to crystalloid or therapies for toxic shock syndromes with refractory albumin bolusing (grade 2C). hypotension (grade 2D). Rationale. Three RCTs compared the use of colloid toRationale. Children are more prone to toxic shock than crystalloid resuscitation in children with hypovolemicadults because of their lack of circulating antibodies to dengue shock with near 100 % survival in all treatmenttoxins. Children with severe sepsis and erythroderma and arms [542–544]. In the industrialized world, two before-suspected toxic shock should be treated with clindamycin and-after studies observed tenfold reductions in mortalityto reduce toxin production. The role of IVIG in toxic when children with purpura/meningococcal septic shockshock syndrome is unclear, but it may be considered in were treated with ﬂuid boluses, inotropes, and mechanicalrefractory toxic shock syndrome [520–527]. ventilation in the community emergency department [545, 546]. In one randomized trial, septic shock mortality was reduced (40–12 %) when increased ﬂuid boluses, blood, and inotropes were given to attain a ScvO2 monitoring3. We recommend early and aggressive infection source goal of greater than 70 % . A quality improvement control (grade 1D). study achieved a reduction in severe sepsis mortality (from 4.0 to 2.4 %) with the delivery of ﬂuid boluses and ´Rationale. Debridement and source control is para- antibiotics in the ﬁrst hour in a pediatric emergencymount in severe sepsis and septic shock. Conditions department to reverse clinical signs of shock . ´requiring debridement or drainage include necrotizing Children normally have a lower blood pressure thanpneumonia, necrotizing fasciitis, gangrenous myonecro- adults, and a fall in blood pressure can be prevented bysis, empyema, and abscesses. Perforated viscus requires vasoconstriction and increasing heart rate. Therefore,repair and peritoneal washout. Delay in use of an appro- blood pressure alone is not a reliable endpoint forpriate antibiotic, inadequate source control, and failure to assessing the adequacy of resuscitation. However, onceremove infected devices are associated with increased hypotension occurs, cardiovascular collapse may soonmortality in a synergistic manner [528–538]. follow. Thus, ﬂuid resuscitation is recommended for both normotensive and hypotensive children in hypovolemic shock [542–554]. Because hepatomegaly and/or rales4. C. difﬁcile colitis should be treated with enteral occur in children who are ﬂuid overloaded, these ﬁndings antibiotics if tolerated. Oral vancomycin is preferred can be helpful signs of hypervolemia. In the absence of for severe disease (grade 1A). these signs, large ﬂuid deﬁcits can exist, and initial volume resuscitation can require 40–60 mL/kg or more;Rationale. In adults, metronidazole is a ﬁrst choice; however, if these signs are present, then ﬂuid adminis-however, response to treatment with C. difﬁcile can be tration should be ceased and diuretics should be given.best with enteral vancomycin. In very severe cases where Inotrope infusions and mechanical ventilation are com-diverting ileostomy or colectomy is performed, parenteral monly required for children with ﬂuid refractory shock.treatment should be considered until clinical improvementis ascertained [539–541]. D. Inotropes/vasopressors/vasodilators 1. We suggest beginning peripheral inotropic supportC. Fluid resuscitation until central venous access can be attained in children1. In the industrialized world with access to inotropes and who are not responsive to ﬂuid resuscitation (grade mechanical ventilation, we suggest that initial resus- 2C). citation of hypovolemic shock begin with infusion of isotonic crystalloids or albumin, with boluses of up to Rationale. Cohort studies show that delay in the use of 20 mL/kg for crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over inotropic therapies is associated with major increases in 5–10 min. These should be titrated to reversing mortality risk [553, 554]. This delay is often related to hypotension, increasing urine output, and attaining difﬁculty in attaining central access. In the initial resus- normal capillary reﬁll, peripheral pulses and level of citation phase, inotrope/vasopressor therapy may be consciousness without inducing hepatomegaly or rales. required to sustain perfusion pressure, even when hypo- If hepatomegaly or rales develop, inotropic support volemia has not yet been resolved. Children with severe should be implemented, not ﬂuid resuscitation. In sepsis can present with low cardiac output and high sys- children with severe hemolytic anemia (severe malaria temic vascular resistance, high cardiac output and low or sickle cell crises) who are not hypotensive, blood systemic vascular resistance, or low cardiac output and
203low systemic vascular resistance shock . A child , with one center reporting 74 % survival to hospitalmay move from one hemodynamic state to another. discharge using central cannulation via sternotomy .Vasopressor or inotrope therapy should be used according ECMO has been used successfully in critically ill H1N1to the hemodynamic state . Dopamine-refractory pediatric patients with refractory respiratory failure [576,shock may reverse with epinephrine or norepinephrine 577].infusion. In the case of extremely low systemic vascularresistance despite the use of norepinephrine, the use ofvasopressin and terlipressin has been described in a F. Corticosteroidsnumber of case reports, yet evidence to support this in 1. We suggest timely hydrocortisone therapy in childrenpediatric sepsis, as well as safety data, are still lacking. with ﬂuid-refractory, catecholamine-resistant shockIndeed, two RCTs showed no beneﬁt in outcome with use and suspected or proven absolute (classic) adrenalof vasopressin or terlipressin in children [556–559]. insufﬁciency (grade 1A).Interestingly, while vasopressin levels are reduced inadults with septic shock, such levels seem to varyextensively in children. When vasopressors are used for Rationale. Approximately 25 % of children with septicrefractory hypotension, the addition of inotropes is com- shock have absolute adrenal insufﬁciency. Patients at riskmonly needed to maintain adequate cardiac output [510, for absolute adrenal insufﬁciency include children with511, 555]. severe septic shock and purpura, those who have previ- ously received steroid therapies for chronic illness, and children with pituitary or adrenal abnormalities. Initial2. We suggest that patients with low cardiac output and treatment is hydrocortisone infusion given at stress doses elevated systemic vascular resistance states with (50 mg/m2/24 h); however, infusions up to 50 mg kg-1 normal blood pressure be given vasodilator therapies day-1 may be required to reverse shock in the short term. in addition to inotropes (grade 2C). Death from absolute adrenal insufﬁciency and septic shock occurs within 8 h of presentation. Obtaining a serum cortisol level at the time empiric hydrocortisone isRationale. The choice of vasoactive agent is initially administered may be helpful [578–583].determined by the clinical examination; however, for thechild with invasive monitoring in place and demonstrationof a persistent low cardiac output state with high systemic G. Protein C and activated protein concentratevascular resistance and normal blood pressure despiteﬂuid resuscitation and inotropic support, vasodilator See ‘‘History of recommendations regarding use oftherapy can reverse shock. Type III phosphodiesterase recombinant activated protein C’’.inhibitors (amrinone, milrinone, enoximone) and thecalcium sensitizer levosimendan can be helpful becausethey overcome receptor desensitization. Other important H. Blood products and plasma therapiesvasodilators include nitrosovasodilators, prostacyclin, andfenoldopam. In two RCTs, pentoxifylline reduced mor- 1. We suggest similar hemoglobin targets in children astality from severe sepsis in newborns [510, 560–569]. in adults. During resuscitation of low superior vena cava oxygen saturation shock (70 %), hemoglobin levels of 10 g/dL are targeted. After stabilization and recovery from shock and hypoxemia, then a lower targetE. Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation [7.0 g/dL can be considered reasonable (grade 1B).1. We suggest ECMO in children with refractory septic shock or with refractory respiratory failure associated Rationale. The optimal hemoglobin for a critically ill with sepsis (grade 2C). child with severe sepsis is not known. A recent multi- center trial reported no difference in mortality inRationale. ECMO may be used to support children and hemodynamically stable critically ill children managedneonates with septic shock or sepsis-associated respira- with a transfusion threshold of 7 g/dL compared withtory failure [570, 571]. The survival of septic patients those managed with a transfusion threshold of 9.5 g/dL;supported with ECMO is 73 % for newborns and 39 % however, the severe sepsis subgroup had an increase infor older children, and is highest in those receiving nosocomial sepsis and lacked clear evidence of equiva-venovenous ECMO . Forty-one percent of children lence in outcomes with the restrictive strategy [584, 585].with a diagnosis of sepsis requiring ECMO for respiratory Blood transfusion is recommended by the World Healthfailure survive to hospital discharge . Venoarterial Organization for severe anemia, hemoglobin value 5 g/ECMO is useful in children with refractory septic shock dL, and acidosis. A RCT of early goal-directed therapy for
204pediatric septic shock using the threshold hemoglobin of Rationale. Although there are no data supporting any10 g/dL for patients with a SvcO2 saturation less than 70 % in particular drugs or regimens, propofol should not be usedthe ﬁrst 72 h of pediatric ICU admission showed improved for long-term sedation in children younger than 3 yearssurvival in the multimodal intervention arm . because of the reported association with fatal metabolic acidosis. The use of etomidate and/or dexmedetomidine during septic shock should be discouraged, or at least2. We suggest similar platelet transfusion targets in considered carefully, because these drugs inhibit the children as in adults (grade 2C). adrenal axis and the sympathetic nervous system,3. We suggest the use of plasma therapies in children to respectively, both of which are needed for hemodynamic correct sepsis-induced thrombotic purpura disorders, stability [617–620]. including progressive disseminated intravascular coag- ulation, secondary thrombotic microangiopathy, and thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (grade 2C). 2. We recommend monitoring drug toxicity labs because drug metabolism is reduced during severe sepsis,Rationale. We give plasma to reverse thrombotic micro- putting children at greater risk of adverse drug-relatedangiopathies in children with thrombocytopenia-associated events (grade 1C).multiple organ failure and progressive purpura becausefresh frozen plasma contains protein C, antithrombin III, Rationale. Children with severe sepsis have reducedand other anticoagulant proteins. Rapid resuscitation of drug metabolism .shock reverses most disseminated intravascular coagula-tion; however, purpura progresses in some children in partdue to critical consumption of antithrombotic proteins (e.g., K. Glycemic controlprotein C, antithrombin III, ADAMTS 13). Plasma is 1. We suggest controlling hyperglycemia using a similarinfused with the goal of correcting prolonged prothrombin/ target as in adults (B180 mg/dL). Glucose infusionpartial thromboplastin times and halting purpura. Large should accompany insulin therapy in newborns andvolumes of plasma require concomitant use of diuretics, children (grade 2C).continuous renal replacement therapy, or plasma exchangeto prevent greater than 10 % ﬂuid overload [586–611]. Rationale. In general, infants are at risk for developing hypoglycemia when they depend on intravenous ﬂuids.I. Mechanical ventilation This means that a glucose intake of 4–6 mg kg-1 min-1 or maintenance ﬂuid intake with dextrose 10 % normal1. We suggest providing lung-protective strategies during saline containing solution is advised (6–8 mg kg-1 min-1 mechanical ventilation (grade 2C). in newborns). Associations have been reported between hyperglycemia and an increased risk of death and longerRationale. Some patients with ARDS will require length of stay. A retrospective pediatric ICU studyincreased PEEP to attain functional residual capacity and reported associations of hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia,maintain oxygenation, and peak pressures above and glucose variability with increased length of stay and30–35 cmH2O to attain effective tidal volumes of 6–8 mL/kg mortality rates. An RCT of strict glycemic control com-with adequate CO2 removal. In these patients, physicians pared to moderate control using insulin in a pediatric ICUgenerally transition from conventional pressure control ven- population found a reduction in mortality with an increasetilation to pressure release ventilation (airway pressure release in hypoglycemia. Insulin therapy should only be con-ventilation) or to high-frequency oscillatory ventilation. ducted with frequent glucose monitoring in view of theThese modes maintain oxygenation with higher mean airway risks for hypoglycemia which can be greater in newbornspressures using an ‘‘open’’ lung ventilation strategy. To be and children due to a) relative lack of glycogen stores andeffective, these modes can require a mean airway pressure muscle mass for gluconeogenesis, and b) the heteroge-5 cmH2O higher than that used with conventional ventilation. neity of the population with some excreting noThis can reduce venous return leading to greater need for ﬂuid endogenous insulin and others demonstrating high insulinresuscitation and vasopressor requirements [612–616]. levels and insulin resistance [622–628].J. Sedation/analgesia/drug toxicities L. Diuretics and renal replacement therapy1. We recommend use of sedation with a sedation goal in 1. We suggest the use of diuretics to reverse ﬂuid over- critically ill mechanically ventilated patients with sepsis load when shock has resolved and if unsuccessful, then (grade 1D). continuous venovenous hemoﬁltration or intermittent
205 dialysis to prevent greater than 10 % total body weight Summary and future directions ﬂuid overload (grade 2C). Although this document is static, the optimum treatmentRationale. A retrospective study of children with of severe sepsis and septic shock is a dynamic andmeningococcemia showed an associated mortality risk evolving process. Additional evidence that has appearedwhen children received too little or too much ﬂuid since the publication of the 2008 guidelines allows moreresuscitation [549, 553]. A retrospective study of 113 certainty with which we make severe sepsis recommen-critically ill children with multiple-organ dysfunction dations; however, further programmatic clinical researchsyndrome reported that patients with less ﬂuid overload in sepsis is essential to optimize these evidence-basedbefore continuous venovenous hemoﬁltration had better medicine recommendations.survival [629–631], New interventions will be proven and established interventions may need modiﬁcation. This publication represents an ongoing process. The SSC and the con- sensus committee members are committed to updating theM. DVT prophylaxis guidelines regularly as new interventions are tested and1. We make no graded recommendations on the use of results published. DVT prophylaxis in prepubertal children with severe sepsis. Acknowledgments The revision process was funded through a grant from the Gordon and Betty Irene Moore Foundation. We would also like to acknowledge the dedication and untold hours ofRationale. Most DVTs in young children are associated donated time of committee members over the last 2 years; thewith central venous catheters. Heparin-bonded catheters sponsoring organizations that worked with us toward the reality of a consensus document across so many disciplines, specialties, andmay decrease the risk of catheter-associated DVT. No continents; and those that contribute in so many ways to create thedata exist on the efﬁcacy of UFH or LMWH prophylaxis new science to move us forward in treating this potentially dev-to prevent catheter-related DVT in children in the ICU astating disease: the funders of research, the investigators, the[632, 633]. subjects, and those associated with the evidence publishing bodies. Finally, we thank Deborah McBride for the incredible editorial support provided persistently over months that brought the manu- script to life and ﬁnalization.N. Stress ulcer prophylaxis Conﬂicts of interest Dr. Dellinger consulted for Biotest (immu-1. We make no graded recommendations on stress ulcer noglobulin concentrate available in Europe for potential use in sepsis) and AstraZeneca (anti-TNF compound unsuccessful in prophylaxis. recently completed sepsis clinical trial); his institution received consulting income from IKARIA for new product developmentRationale. Studies have shown that clinically important (IKARIA has inhaled nitric oxide available for off-label use in ARDS) and grant support from Spectral Diagnostics Inc (currentGI bleeding in children occurs at rates similar to those of endotoxin removal clinical trial), Ferring (vasopressin analogadults. Stress ulcer prophylaxis is commonly used in clinical trial-ongoing), as well as serving on speakers bureau forchildren who are mechanically ventilated, usually with H2 Eisai (anti-endotoxin compound that failed to show beneﬁt inblockers or proton pump inhibitors, although Its effect is clinical trial). Dr. Levy received grant support from Eisai (Ocean State Clinical Coordinating Center to fund clinical trial [$500 K]),not known [634, 635]. he received honoraria from Eli Lilly (lectures in India $8,000), and he has been involved with the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guideline from its beginning. Dr. Rhodes consulted for Eli Lilly with mon-O. Nutrition etary compensation paid to himself as well as his institution (Steering Committee for the PROWESS Shock trial) and LiDCO;1. Enteral nutrition should be used in children who can travel/accommodation reimbursement was received from Eli Lilly tolerate it, parenteral feeding in those who cannot and LiDCO; he received income for participation in review activ- ities such as data monitoring boards, statistical analysis from Orion, (grade 2C). and for Eli Lilly; he is an author on manuscripts describing early goal-directed therapy, and believes in the concept of minimallyRationale. Dextrose 10 % (always with sodium-con- invasive hemodynamic monitoring. Dr. Annane participated on the Fresenius Kabi International Advisory Board (honorarium 2000€).taining solution in children) at maintenance rate provides His nonﬁnancial disclosures include being the principal investigatorthe glucose delivery requirements for newborns and of a completed investigator-led multicenter randomized controlledchildren . Patients with sepsis have increased glu- trial assessing the early guided beneﬁt to risk of NIRS tissuecose delivery needs which can be met by this regimen. oxygen saturation; he was the principal investigator of an investi-Speciﬁc measurement of caloric requirements are thought gator-led randomized controlled trial of epinephrine versus norepinephrine (CATS study)–Lancet 2007; he also is the principleto be best attained using a metabolic cart as they are investigator of an ongoing investigator-led multinational random-generally less in the critically ill child than in the healthy ized controlled trial of crystalloids versus colloids (Crystal Study).child. Dr. Gerlach disclosed that he has no potential conﬂicts of interest;
206he is an author of a review on the use of activated protein C in government funded (nonindustry) grant. Grant awarded to chiefsurgical patients (published in the New England Journal of Medi- investigator from ICNARC. She is a trial clinician for ProMISe. Dr.cine, 2009). Dr. Opal consulted for Genzyme Transgenics Nunnally received a stipend for a chapter on diabetes mellitus; he is(consultant on transgenic antithrombin $1,000), Pﬁzer (consultant an author of editorials contesting classic tight glucose control. Dr.on TLR4 inhibitor project $3,000), British Therapeutics (consultant Townsend is an advocate for healthcare quality improvement. Dr.on polyclonal antibody project $1,000), and Biotest A (consultant Reinhart consulted for EISAI (Steering Committee member—lesson immunoglobin project $2,000). His institution received grant then US $10,000); BRAHMS Diagnostics (less than US $10,000);support from Novartis (Clinical Coordinating Center to assist in and SIRS-Lab Jena (founding member, less than US $10,000). Hepatient enrollment in a phase III trial with the use of Tissue Factor received honararia for lectures including service on the speakers’Pathway Inhibitor (TFPI) in severe community acquired pneumonia bureau from Biosyn Germany (less than €10,000) and Braun(SCAP) $30,000 for 2 years), Eisai ($30,000 for 3 years), Astra Melsungen (less than €10,000). He received royalties from EdwardsZeneca ($30,000 for 1 year), Aggenix ($30,000 for 1 year), Inimex Life Sciences for sales of central venous oxygen catheters($10,000), Eisai ($10,000), Atoxbio ($10,000), Wyeth ($20,000), (*$100,000). Dr. Kleinpell received monetary compensation forSirtris (preclinical research $50,000), and Cellular Bioengineering providing expert testimony (four depositions and one trial in theInc. ($500). He received honoraria from Novartis (clinical evalua- past year). Her institution receives grants from the Agency fortion committee TFPI study for SCAP $20,000) and Eisai ($25,000). Healthcare Research and Quality and the Prince Foundation (4-yearHe received travel/accommodations reimbursed from Sangart (data R01 grant, PI and 3-year foundation grant, Co-l). She receivedand safety monitoring $2,000), Spectral Diagnostics (data and honoraria from the Cleveland Clinic and the American Associationsafety monitoring $2,000), Takeda (data and safety monitoring of Critical Care Nurses for keynote speeches at conferences; she$2,000) and Canadian trials group ROS II oseltamivir study (data received royalties from McGraw Hill (co-editor of critical careand safety monitoring board (no money). He is also on the Data review book); travel/accommodations reimbursed from the Amer-Safety Monitoring Board for Tetraphase (received US $600 in ican Academy of Nurse Practitioners, Society of Critical Care2012). Dr. Sevransky received grant support to his institution from Medicine, and American Association of Critical Care Nurses (oneSirius Genomics Inc; he consulted for Idaho Technology ($1,500); night hotel coverage at national conference). Dr. Angus consultedhe is the co-principal investigator of a multicenter study evaluating for Eli Lilly (member of the Data Safety Monitoring Board, Mul-the association between ICU organizational and structural factors, ticenter trial of a PC for septic shock), Eisai Inc (Anti-TLR4including protocols and in-patient mortality. He maintains that therapy for severe sepsis), and Idaho Technology (sepsis bio-protocols serve as useful reminders to busy clinicians to consider markers); he received grant support (investigator, long-term follow-certain therapies in patients with sepsis or other life threatening up of phase III trial of an anti-TLR4 agent in severe sepsis), aillness. Dr. Sprung received grants paid to his institution from consulting income (anti-TRL4 therapy for severe sepsis), and tra-Artisan Pharma ($25,000–$50,000), Eisai, Corp ($1,000-$5,000 vel/accommodation expense reimbursement from Eisai, Inc; he isACCESS), Ferring Pharmaceuticals A/S ($5,000–$10,000), the primary investigator for an ongoing National Institutes ofHutchinson Technology Incorporated ($1,000-$5,000), Novartis Health-funded study comparing early resuscitation strategies forCorp (less than $1,000). His institution receives grant support for sepsis induced tissue hypoperfusion. Dr. Deutschman has nonﬁ-patients enrolled in clinical studies from Eisai Corporation (PI. nancial involvement as a coauthor of the Society of Critical CarePatients enrolled in the ACCESS study $50,000–$100,000), Takeda Medicine’s Glycemic Control guidelines. Dr. Machado reports(PI. Study terminated before patients enrolled). He received grants unrestricted grant support paid to her institution for Survivingpaid to his institution and consulting income from Artisan Pharma/ Sepsis Campaign implementation in Brazil (Eli Lilly do Brasil); sheAsahi Kasei Pharma America Corp ($25,000–$50,000). He con- is the primary investigator for an ongoing study involving vaso-sulted for Eli Lilly (Sabbatical Consulting fee $10,000–$25,000) pressin. Dr. Rubenfeld received grant support from nonproﬁtand received honoraria from Eli Lilly (lecture $1,000–$5,000). He agencies or foundations including National Institutes of Health ($10is a member of the Australia and New Zealand Intensive Care million), Robert Wood Johnson Foundation ($500,000), and CIHRSociety Clinical Trials Group for the NICE SUGAR Study (no ($200,000). His institution received grants from for-proﬁt compa-money received); he is a council member of the International Sepsis nies including Advanced Lifeline System ($150,000), SiemensForum (as of Oct. 2010); he has held long time research interests in ($50,000), Bayer ($10,000), Byk Gulden ($15,000), AstraZenecasteroids in sepsis, PI of Corticus study, end-of-life decision making ($10,000), Faron Pharmaceuticals ($5,000), and Cerus Corporationand PI of Ethicus, Ethicatt, and Welpicus studies. Dr. Douglas ($11,000). He received honoraria, consulting fees, editorship, roy-received grants paid to his institution from Eli Lilly (PROWESS alties, and Data and Safety Monitoring Board membership fees paidShock site), Eisai (study site), National Institutes of Health (ARDS to him from Bayer ($500), DHD ($1,000), Eli Lilly ($5,000),Network), Accelr8 (VAP diagnostics), CCCTG (Oscillate Study), Oxford University Press ($10,000), Hospira ($15,000), Cernerand Hospira (Dexmedetomidine in Alcohol Withdrawal RCT). His ($5,000), Pﬁzer ($1,000), KCI ($7,500), American Association forinstitution received an honorarium from the Society of Critical Care Respiratory Care ($10,000), American Thoracic Society ($7,500),Medicine (Paragon ICU Improvement); he consulted for Eli Lilly BioMed Central ($1,000), National Institutes of Health ($1,500),(PROWESS Shock SC and Sepsis Genomics Study) in accordance and the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research ($250).with institutional policy; he received payment for providing expert He has database access or other intellectual (non-ﬁnancial) supporttestimony (Smith Moore Leatherwood LLP); travel/accommoda- from Cerner. Dr. Webb consulted for AstraZeneca (anti-infectivestions reimbursed by Eli Lilly and Company (PROWESS Shock $1,000–$5,000) and Jansen-Cilag (ani-infectives $1,000-$5,000).Steering Committee) and the Society of Critical Care Medicine He received grant support from a NHMRC project grant (ARISE(Hospital Quality Alliance, Washington DC, four times per year RECT of EGDT); NHMRC project grant and Fresinius-unrestricted2009–2011); he received honoraria from Covidien (non-CME lec- grant (CHEST RCT of voluven vs saline); RCT of steroid versusture 2010, US$500) and the University of Minnesota Center for placebo for septic shock); NHMRC project grant (BLISS study ofExcellence in Critical Care CME program (2009, 2010); he has a bacteria detection by PRC in septic shock) Intensive Care Foun-pending patent for a bed backrest elevation monitor. Dr. Jaeschke dation-ANZ (BLING pilot RCT of betalactam administration bydisclosed that he has no potential conﬂicts of interest. Dr. Osborn infusion); Hospira (SPICE programme of sedation deliriumconsulted for Sui Generis Health ($200). Her institution receives research); NHMRC Centres for Research Excellent Grant (criticalgrant support from the National Institutes of Health Research, illness microbiology observational studies); Hospira-unrestrictedHealth Technology Assessment Programme-United Kingdom (trial grant (DAHlia RCT of dexmedetomidine for agitated delirium).doctor for sepsis related RCT). Salary paid through the NIHR Travel/accommodations reimbursed by Jansen-Cilag ($5,000–
207$10,000) and AstraZeneca ($1,000–$5,000); he has a patent for a Paolo Biban,3 Julian F. Bion, Thierry Calandra, Joseph A.meningococcal vaccine. He is chair of the ANZICS Clinical Trials Carcillo, Terry P. Clemmer, Clifford S. Deutschman, J.V.Group and is an investigator in trials of EGDT, PCR for deter-mining bacterial load and a steroid in the septic shock trial. Dr. Divatia,4 Ivor S. Douglas, Bin Du,5 Seitaro Fujishima,Beale received compensation for his participation as board member Satoshi Gando,6 Herwig Gerlach, Caryl Goodyear- ´for Eisai, Inc, Applied Physiology, bioMerieux, Covidien, SIRS- Bruch,7 Gordon Guyatt, Jan A. Hazelzet, HiroyukiLab, and Novartis; consulting income was paid to his institution Hirasawa,8 Steven M. Hollenberg, Judith Jacobi, Romanfrom PriceSpective Ltd, Easton Associates (soluble guanylatecyclase activator in acute respiratory distress syndrome/acute lung Jaeschke, Ian Jenkins,9 Edgar Jimenez,10 Alan E. Jones,11injury adjunct therapy to supportive care and ventilation strategies), Robert M. Kacmarek, Winfried Kern,12 Ruth M.Eisai (eritoran), and Phillips (Respironics); he provided expert Kleinpell,1 Shin Ok Koh,13 Joji Kotani, Mitchell Levy,14testimony for Eli Lilly and Company (paid to his institution); Flavia Machado,15 John Marini, John C. Marshall, Henryhonoraria received (paid to his institution) from Applied Physiol-ogy (Applied Physiology PL SAB, Applied Physiology SAB, Masur, Sangeeta Mehta, John Muscedere,16 Lena M.Brussels, Satellite Symposium at the ISICEM, Brussels), bio- Napolitano,17 Mark E. Nunnally, Steven M. Opal,18 Tif- ´Merieux (GeneXpert Focus Group, France), SIRS-Lab (SIRS-LAB fany M. Osborn,19 Margaret M. Parker, Joseph E.SAB Forum, Brussels and SIRS-LAB SAB, Lisbon), Eli Lilly Parrrillo, Haibo Qiu,20 Adrienne G. Randolph, Konrad(CHMP Hearing), Eisai (eritoran through leader touch plan in Reinhart,21 Jordi Rello, Ederlon Resende,22 AndrewBrussels), Eli Lilly (Lunchtime Symposium, Vienna), Covidien(adult monitoring advisory board meeting, Frankfurt), Covidien Rhodes,23 Emanuel P. Rivers, Gordon D. Rubenfeld,24(Global Advisory Board CNIBP Boulder USA), Eli Lilly and Christa A. Schorr, Jonathan E. Sevransky, Khalid Shu-Company (development of educational presentations including kri,25 Eliezer Silva, Mark D. Soth, Charles L. Sprung,service on speaker’ bureaus (intensive care school hosted in Ann E. Thompson,26 Sean R. Townsend, Jeffery S.department); travel/accommodations were reimbursed from bio-Merieux (GeneXpert Focus Group, France) and LiDCO (Winter Vender,27 Jean-Louis Vincent, Steve A. Webb,28 TobiasAnaesthetic and Critical Care Review Conference), Surviving Welte,29 Janice L. Zimmerman. 1Sepsis Campaign (Publications Meeting, New York; Care Bundles World Federation of Critical Care Nurses; 2EmiratesConference, Manchester), SSC Publication Committee Meeting and Intensive Care Society; 3European Society of PediatricSSC Executive Committee Meeting, Nashville; SSC Meeting,Manchester), Novartis (Advisory Board Meeting, Zurich), Institute and Neonatal Intensive Care; 4Indian Society of Criticalof Biomedical Engineering (Hospital of the Future Grand Chal- Care Medicine; 5Chinese Society of Critical Care Medi-lenge Kick-Off Meeting, Hospital of the Future Grand Challenge cine; 6Japanese Association for Acute Medicine; 7Interviews EPSRC Headquarters, Swindon, Philips (Kick-Off American Association of Critical-Care Nurses, 8JapaneseMeeting, Boeblingen, Germany; MET Conference, Cohenhagen), Society of Intensive Care Medicine; 9Society of HospitalCovidien (Adult Monitoring Advisory Board Meeting, Frankfurt),Eisai (ACCESS Investigators Meeting, Barcelona). His non-ﬁnan- Medicine; 10World Federation of Societies of Intensivecial disclosures include authorship of the position statement on ﬂuid and Critical Care Medicine; 11Society of Academicresuscitation from the ESICM task force on colloids (yet to be Emergency Medicine; 12European Society of Clinicalﬁnalized). Dr. Vincent reports consulting income paid to his insti- Microbiology and Infectious Diseases; 13Asia Paciﬁctution from Astellas, AstraZeneca, Curacyte, Eli Lilly, Eisai,Ferring, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, and Pﬁzer. His institution Association of Critical Care Medicine; 14Society ofreceived honoraria on his behalf from Astellas, AstraZeneca, Cu- Critical Care Medicine; 15Latin American Sepsis Insti-racyte, Eli Lilly, Eisai, Ferring, Merck, and Pﬁzer. His institution tute; 16Canadian Critical Care Society; 17Surgicalreceived grant support from Astellas, Curacyte, Eli Lilly, Eisai, Infection Society; 18Infectious Diseases Society ofFerring, and Pﬁzer. His institution received payment for educa-tional presentations from Astellas, AstraZeneca, Curacyte, Eli America; 19American College of Emergency Physicians; 20Lilly, Eisai, Ferring, Merck, and Pﬁzer. Dr. Moreno consulted for Chinese Society of Critical Care-China Medical Asso-bioMerieux (expert meeting). He is a coauthor of a paper on cor- ciation; 21German Sepsis Society; 22Brazilian Society ofticosteroids in patients with septic shock. He is the author of several Critical Care (AMIB); 23European Society of Intensivemanuscripts deﬁning sepsis and stratiﬁcation of the patient with Care Medicine; 24American Thoracic Society; 25Interna-sepsis. He is also the author of several manuscripts contesting theutility of sepsis bundles. Complete author and committee disclo- tional Pan Arab Critical Care Medicine Society; 26sures are listed in Supplemental Digital Content 1. Pediatric Acute Lung Injury and Sepsis Investigators; 27 American College of Chest Physicians; 28Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society; 29European Respi- ratory Society; World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies.Appendix 12012 Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Pediatric SubgroupCommittee Jan A. Hazelzet, Adrienne G. Randolph, Margaret M.R. Phillip Dellinger, (Co-Chair); Rui Moreno (Co-Chair); Parker, Ann E. Thompson, Paolo Biban, Alan Duncan,Leanne Aitken,1 Hussain Al Rahma,2 Derek C. Angus, Cristina Mangia, Niranjan Kissoon, and Joseph A. Car-Dijillali Annane, Richard J. Beale, Gordon R. Bernard, cillo (Head).
209Appendix 3ARDSnet ventilator management Assist control mode—volume ventilation Reduce tidal volume to 6 mL/kg lean body weight Keep plateau pressure 30 cmH2O Reduce tidal volume as low as 4 mL/kg predicted body weight to limit plateau pressure Maintain SaO2/SpO2 between 88 and 95 % Anticipated PEEP settings at various Fio2 requirements FIo2 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 PEEP 5 5 8 8 10 10 10 12 14 14 14 16 18 20–24Predicted body weight calculation Male—50 ? 2.3 [height (in.) - 60] or 50 ? 0.91 [height (cm) - 152.4] Female—45.5 ? 2.3 [height (in.) - 60] or 45.5 ? 0.91 [height (cm) - 152.4]Adapted from Sao2 arterial oxygen saturation, PEEP positive end-expiratory pressure, Spo2 oxygen saturation on pulse oximetryAppendix 4Summary of ventilator procedures in the higher-PEEP groups of the ALVEOLI TrialProcedure ValueVentilator mode Volume assist/controlTidal-volume goal 6 mL/kg of predicted body weightPlateau-pressure goal B30 cmH2OVentilator rate and pH 6–35, adjusted to achieve arterial pH C7.30 if possible goalInspiration:expiration 1:1–1:3 timeOxygenation goal PaO2 55–80 mmHg SpO2 88–95 % Weaning Weaning attempted by means of pressure support when level of arterial oxygenation acceptable with PEEP 8 cmH2O and FiO2 0.40Allowable combinations of PEEP and FiO2aHigher-PEEP group (after protocol changed to use higher levels of PEEP)FiO2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5–0.8 0.8 0.9 1PEEP 12 14 14 16 16 18 20 22 22 22–24Complete ventilator procedures and eligibility criteria can be found a In both study groups (lower and higher PEEP), additionalat ‘‘http://www.ardsnet.org’’ increases in PEEP to 34 cm H2O were allowed but not requiredSpO2 oxyhemoglobin saturation as measured by pulse oximetry, after Fio2 had been increased to 1.0, according to the protocolFIO2 fraction of inspired oxygen, PEEP positive end-expiratory Adapted from pressure
210References 1. Angus DC, Linde-Zwirble WT, 14. Early Goal-Directed Therapy 25. Reinhart K, Kuhn HJ, Hartog C et al Lidicker J et al (2001) Epidemiology Collaborative Group of Zhejiang (2004) Continuous central venous and of severe sepsis in the United States: Province (2010) The effect of early pulmonary artery oxygen saturation analysis of incidence, outcome, and goal-directed therapy on treatment of monitoring in the critically ill. associated costs of care. Crit Care Med critical patients with severe sepsis/ Intensive Care Med 30:1572–1578 29:1303–1310 septic shock: a multi-center, 26. Trzeciak S, Dellinger RP, Abate N 2. Dellinger RP (2003) Cardiovascular prospective, randomized, controlled et al (2006) Translating research to management of septic shock. Crit Care study (in Chinese). Zhongguo Wei clinical practice: a 1-year experience Med 31:946–955 Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue 6:331–334 with implementing early goal-directed 3. Martin GS, Mannino DM, Eaton S 15. Levy MM, Dellinger RP, Townsend therapy for septic shock in the et al (2003) The epidemiology of SR, Surviving Sepsis Campaign et al emergency department. Chest sepsis in the United States from 1979 (2010) The Surviving Sepsis 129:225–232 through 2000. N Engl J Med Campaign: results of an international 27. Magder S (2006) Central venous 348:1546–1554 guideline-based performance pressure: a useful but not so simple 4. Linde-Zwirble WT, Angus DC (2004) improvement program targeting severe measurement. Crit Care Med Severe sepsis epidemiology: sampling, sepsis. Crit Care Med 38:367–374 34:2224–2227 selection, and society. Crit Care 16. Bendjelid K, Romand JA (2003) Fluid 28. Bendjelid K (2005) Right arterial 8:222–226 responsiveness in mechanically pressure: determinant or result of 5. Dombrovskiy VY, Martin AA, ventilated patients: a review of indices change in venous return? Chest Sunderram J et al (2007) Rapid used in intensive care. Intensive Care 128:3639–3640 increase in hospitalization and Med 29:352–360 29. Vincent JL, Weil MH (2006) Fluid mortality rates for severe sepsis in the 17. Malbrain ML, Deeren D, De Potter TJ challenge revisited. Crit Care Med United States: a trend analysis from (2005) Intraabdominal hypertension in 34:1333–1337 1993 to 2003. Crit Care Med the critically ill: it is time to pay 30. Trzeciak S, Dellinger RP, Parrillo JE 35:1414–1415 attention. Curr Opin Crit Care et al (2007) Early microcirculatory 6. Levy MM, Fink MP, Marshall JC et al 11:156–171 perfusion derangements in patients (2003) 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ 18. Varpula M, Tallgren M, Saukkonen K with severe sepsis and septic shock: ATS/SIS international sepsis et al (2005) Hemodynamic variables relationship to hemodynamics, oxygen deﬁnitions conference. Crit Care Med related to outcome in septic shock. transport, and survival. Ann Emerg 31:1250–1256 Intensive Care Med 31:1066–1071 Med 49:88–98 7. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Carlet JM 19. Kortgen A, Niederprum P, Bauer M 31. De Backer D, Creteur J, Dubois MJ et al (2008) International guidelines (2006) Implementation of an et al (2006) The effects of dobutamine for management of severe sepsis and evidence-based ‘‘standard operating on microcirculatory alternations in septic shock. Crit Care Med procedure’’ and outcome in septic patients with septic shock are 36:296–327 (Erratum in: Crit Care shock. Crit Care Med 34:943–949 independent of its systemic effects. Med 2008; 36:1394–1396 and 20. Sebat F, Johnson D, Musthafa AA et al Crit Care Med 34:403–408 Intensive Care Med 2008; 34:17–60) (2005) A multidisciplinary community 32. Buwalda M, Ince C (2002) Opening 8. Dellinger RP, Carlet JM, Masur H et al hospital program for early and rapid the microcirculation: can vasodilators (2004) Surviving sepsis campaign resuscitation of shock in nontrauma be useful in sepsis? Intensive Care guidelines for management of severe patients. Chest 127:1729–1743 Med 28:1208–1217 sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Med 21. Shapiro NI, Howell MD, Talmor D 33. Boldt J (2002) Clinical review: 32:858–873 and Intensive Care Med et al (2006) Implementation and hemodynamic monitoring in the 30:536–555 outcomes of the multiple urgent sepsis intensive care unit. Crit Care 6:52–59 9. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE et al therapies (MUST) protocol. Crit Care 34. Pinsky MR, Payen D (2005) (2008) GRADE: an emerging Med 34:1025–1032 Functional hemodynamic monitoring. consensus on rating quality of 22. Micek SST, Roubinian N, Heuring T Crit Care 9:566–572 evidence and strength of et al (2006) Before-after study of a 35. Jones AE, Shapiro NI, Trzeciak S, recommendations. BMJ 336:924–926 standardized hospital order set for the Emergency MEDICINE SHOCK10. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R et al management of septic shock. Crit Care RESEARCH NETWORk (2008) What is ‘‘quality of evidence’’ Med 34:2707–2713 (EMShockNet) Investigators et al and why is it important to clinicians? 23. Nguyen HB, Corbett SW, Steele R (2010) Lactate clearance vs central BMJ 336:995–998 et al (2007) Implementation of a venous oxygen saturation as goals of11. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R et al bundle of quality indicators for the early sepsis therapy: a randomized (2008) Going from evidence to early management of severe sepsis and clinical trial. JAMA 303:739–746 recommendations. BMJ septic shock is associated with 36. Jansen TC, van Bommel J, 336:1049–1051 decreased mortality. Crit Care Med Schoonderbeek FJ et al (2010) Early z ¨12. Bro_ ek J, Oxman AD, Schunemann HJ 35:1105–1112 lactate-guided therapy in intensive (2012) GRADEpro (computer 24. Shorr AF, Micek ST, Jackson WL Jr care unit patients: a multicenter, open- program) version 3.2 for windows. et al (2007) Economic implications of label, randomized controlled trial. Am http://www.cc-ims.net/revman/ an evidence-based sepsis protocol: can J Respir Crit Care Med 182:752–761 gradepro we improve outcomes and lower 37. Cinel I, Dellinger RP (2006) Current13. Rivers E, Nguyen B, Havstad S et al costs? Crit Care Med 35:1257–1262 treatment of severe sepsis. Curr Infect (2001) Early goal-directed therapy in Dis Rep 8:358–365 the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med 345:1368–1377
21138. Moore LJ, Jones SL, Kreiner LA et al 50. Levy MM, Pronovost PJ, Dellinger RP 61. Tissari P, Zumla A, Tarkka E et al (2009) Validation of a screening tool et al (2004) Sepsis change bundles: (2010) Accurate and rapid for the early identiﬁcation of sepsis. converting guidelines into meaningful identiﬁcation of bacterial species from J Trauma 66:1539–1546 (discussion change in behavior and clinical positive blood cultures with a DNA- 1546–1547) outcome. Crit Care Med based microarray platform: an39. Subbe CP, Kruger M, Rutherford P 32(Suppl):S595–S597 observational study. Lancet et al (2001) Validation of a modiﬁed 51. Weinstein MP, Reller LP, Murphy JR 16(375):224–230 early warning score in medical et al (1983) The clinical signiﬁcance 62. Alam FF, Mustafa AS, Khan ZU admissions. Quart J Med 94:521–526 of positive blood cultures: a (2007) Comparative evaluation of40. Evaluation for Severe Sepsis comprehensive analysis of 500 (1,3)-beta-D-glucan, mannan and anti- Screening Tool, Institute for episodes of bacteremia and fungemia mannan antibodies, and Candida Healthcare Improvement (IHI). in adults. I. Laboratory and species-speciﬁc snPCR in patients http://www.ihi.org/IHI/Topics/ epidemiologic observations. Rev with candidemia. BMC Infect Dis CriticalCare/Sepsis/Tools/Evaluation Infect Dis 5:35–53 7:103 forSevereSepsisScreeningTool.htm 52. Blot F, Schmidt E, Nitenberg G et al 63. Oliveri S, Trovato L, Betta P et al41. Evaluation for severe sepsis screening (1998) Earlier positivity of central (2008) Experience with the Platelia tool (2012) http://www. venous versus peripheral blood Candida ELISA for the diagnosis of survivingsepsis.org/ﬁles/Tools/ cultures is highly predictive of invasive candidosis in neonatal evaluation catheter-related sepsis. J Clin patients. Clin Microbiol Infect forseveresepsisscreeningtool.pdf Microbiol 36:105–109 14:391–39342. Rivers EP, Ahrens T (2008) Improving 53. Mermel LA, Maki DG (1993) 64. Sendid B, Poirot JL, Tabouret M et al outcomes for severe sepsis and septic Detection of bacteremia in adults: (2002) Combined detection of shock: tools for early identiﬁcation of consequences of culturing an mannanaemia and antimannan at-risk patients and treatment protocol inadequate volume of blood. Ann antibodies as a strategy for the implementation. Crit Care Clin 23:S1– Intern Med 119:270–272 diagnosis of systemic infection caused S47 54. (2005) Guidelines for the management by pathogenic Candida species. J Med43. Gao F, Melody T, Daniels DF et al of adults with hospital-acquired, Microbiol 51:433–442 (2005) The impact of compliance with ventilator-associated, and healthcare- 65. Sendid B, Jouault T, Coudriau R et al 6-hour and 24-hour sepsis bundles on associated pneumonia. Am J Respir (2004) Increased sensitivity of hospital mortality in patients with Crit Care Med 171:388–416 mannanemia detection tests by joint severe sepsis: a prospective 55. Muscedere J, Dodek P, Keenan S et al detection of alpha- and beta-linked observational study. Crit Care (2008) Comprehensive evidence-based oligomannosides during experimental 9:R764–R770 clinical practice guidelines for and human systemic candidiasis.44. Schorr C (2009) Performance ventilator-associated pneumonia: J Clin Microbiol 42:164–171 improvement in the management of diagnosis and treatment. J Crit Care 66. Sendid B, Dotan N, Nseir S et al sepsis. Crit Care Clin 25:857–867 23:138–147 (2008) Antibodies against glucan,45. Girardis M, Rinaldi L, Donno L et al 56. Giamarellos-Bourboulis EJ, chitin, and Saccharomyces cerevisiae (2009) Sopravvivere alla Sepsi Group Giannopoulou P, Grecka P et al (2004) mannan as new biomarkers of of the Modena-University Hospital: Should procalcitonin be introduced in Candida albicans infection that effects on management and outcome the diagnostic criteria for the systemic complement tests based on C. albicans of severe sepsis and septic shock inﬂammatory response syndrome and mannan. Clin Vaccine Immunol patients admitted to the intensive care sepsis? J Crit Care 19:152–157 15:1868–1877 unit after implementation of a sepsis 57. Uzzan B, Cohen R, Nicolas P et al 67. Yera H, Sendid B, Francois N et al program: a pilot study. Crit Care (2006) Procalcitonin as a diagnostic (2001) Contribution of serological 13:R143 test for sepsis in critically ill adults tests and blood culture to the early ˜ ¨46. Pestana D, Espinosa E, Sanguesa- after surgery or trauma: a systematic diagnosis of systemic candidiasis. Eur Molina JR et al (2010) Compliance review and meta-analysis. Crit Care J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis with a sepsis bundle and its effect on Med 34:1996–2003 20:864–870 intensive care unit mortality in 58. Tang BM, Eslick GD, Craig JC et al 68. Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE et al surgical septic shock patients. (2007) Accuracy of procalcitonin for (2006) Duration of hypotension prior J Trauma 69:1282–1287 sepsis diagnosis in critically ill to initiation of effective antimicrobial47. Berenholtz SM, Pronovost PJ, Ngo K patients: systematic review and meta- therapy is the critical determinant of et al (2007) Developing quality analysis. Lancet Infect Dis 7:210–217 survival in human septic shock. Crit measures for sepsis care in the ICU. Jt 59. Tenover FC (2007) Rapid detection Care Med 34:1589–1596 Comm J Qual Patient Safety and identiﬁcation of bacterial 69. Morrell M, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH 33:559–568 pathogens using novel molecular (2005) Delaying the empiric treatment48. Black MD, Schorr C, Levy MM technologies: infection control and of candida bloodstream infection until (2012) Knowledge translation and the beyond. Clin Infect Dis 44:418–423 positive blood culture results are multifaceted intervention in the 60. Klouche M, Schroder U (2008) Rapid obtained: a potential risk factor for intensive care unit. Crit Care Med methods for diagnosis of bloodstream hospital mortality. Antimicrob Agents 40:1324–1328 infections. Clin Chem Lab Med Chemother 49:3640–364549. Suarez A, Ferrer R, Artigas A et al 46:888–908 70. Ferrer R, Artigas A, Suarez D et al (2011) Cost-effectiveness of the (2009) Effectiveness of treatments for Surviving Sepsis Campaign protocol severe sepsis: a prospective, for severe sepsis: a prospective multicenter, observational study. Am J nationwide study in Spain. Intensive Respir Crit Care Med 180:861–866 Care Med 37:444–452
21271. Barie PS, Hydo LJ, Shou J et al (2005) 82. Amsden GW, Ballow CH, Bertino JS 92. Rodriguez A, Mendia A, Sirvent JM Inﬂuence of antibiotic therapy on (2010) Pharmacokinetics and et al (2007) Combination antibiotic mortality of critical illness caused or pharmacodynamics of anti-infective therapy improves survival in patients complicated by infection. Surg Infect agents. In: Mandell GL, Bennett JE, with community-acquired pneumonia 6:41–54 Dolin R (eds) Principles and practice and shock. Crit Care Med72. Castellanos-Ortega A, Suberviola B, of infectious diseases, 7th edn. 35:1493–1498 Garcia-Astudillo LA et al (2010) Churchill Livingstone, Philadelphia, 93. Baddour LM, Yu VL, Klugman KP Impact of the surviving sepsis pp 297–307 et al (2004) Combination antibiotic protocols on hospital length of stay 83. Heyland DK, Reynolds S, Jiang X et al therapy lowers mortality among and mortality in septic shock patients: (2011) Procalcitonin for reduced severely ill patients with results of a three-year follow-up quasi- antibiotic exposure in the critical care pneumococcal bacteremia. Am J experimental study. Crit Care Med setting: a systematic review and an Respir Crit Care Med 170:440–444 38:1036–1043 economic evaluation. Crit Care Med 94. Safdar N, Handelsman J, Maki DG73. Puskarich MA, Trzeciak S, Shapiro 39:1792–1799 (2004) Does combination MI et al (2011) Association between 84. Jensen JU, Hein L, Lundgren B et al antimicrobial therapy reduce mortality timing of antibiotic administration and (2011) Procalcitonin-guided in Gram-negative bacteraemia? A mortality from septic shock inpatients interventions against infections to meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis treated with a quantitative increase early appropriate antibiotics 4:519–527 resuscitation protocol. Crit Care Med and improve survival in the intensive 95. Paul M, Silbiger I, Grozinsky S et al 39:2066–2071 care unit: a randomized trial. Crit Care (2006) Beta lactam antibiotic74. El Solh AA, Akinnusi ME, Alsawalha Med 39:2048–2058 monotherapy versus beta lactam LN et al (2008) Outcome of septic 85. Brunkhorst FM, Oppert M, Marx G aminoglycoside antibiotic shock in older adults after et al (2012) Effect of empirical combination therapy for sepsis. implementation of the sepsis treatment with moxiﬂoxacin and Cochrane Database Syst Rev ‘‘Bundle’’. J Am Geriat Soc meropenem vs meropenem on sepsis- (1):CD003344 56:272–278 related organ dysfunction in patients 96. Garnacho-Montero J, Sa-Borges M,75. Gurnani PK, Patel GP, Crank CW et al with severe sepsis. JAMA Sole-Violan J et al (2007) Optimal (2010) Impact of the implementation 307:2390–2399 management therapy for Pseudomonas of a sepsis protocol for the 86. Kumar A, Safdar N, Kethireddy S et al aeruginosa ventilator associated management of ﬂuid-refractory septic (2010) A survival beneﬁt of pneumonia: an observational, shock: a single-center, before-and- combination antibiotic therapy for multicenter study comparing after study. Clin Therap 32:1285–1293 serious infections associated with monotherapy with combination76. Larsen GY, Mecham N, Greenberg R sepsis and septic shock is contingent antibiotic therapy. Crit Care Med (2011) An emergency department only of death: a meta-analytic/meta- 35:1888–1895 septic shock protocol and care regression study. Crit Care Med 97. Jain S, Kamimoto L, Bramley AM guideline for children initiated at 38:1651–1664 et al (2009) Hospitalized patients with triage. Pediatrics 127:e1585–e1592 87. Kumar A, Zarychanski R, Light B et al 2009 H1N1 inﬂuenza in the United77. Barochia AV, Cui X, Vitberg D et al (2010) Early combination antibiotic States, April–June 2009. N Engl J Med (2010) Bundled care for septic shock: therapy yields improved survival 361:1935–1944 an analysis of clinical trials. Crit Care compared with monotherapy: a 98. Writing Committee of the WHO Med 38:668–678 propensity-matched analysis. Crit Care Consultation on Clinical Aspects of78. Pappas PG, Kauffman CA, Andes D Med 38:1773–1785 Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Inﬂuenza, et al (2009) Clinical practice 88. Micek ST, Welch EC, Khan J et al Bautista E, Chotpitayasunondh T et al guidelines for the management of (2010) Empiric combination (2009) Clinical aspects of pandemic candidiasis: 2009 update by the antimicrobial therapy is associated inﬂuenza A (H1N1) virus infection. Infectious Diseases Society of with improved outcome against sepsis N Engl J Med 2010(362):1708–1719 America. Clin Infect Dis 48:503–535 due to gram-negative bacteria: a 99. Smith JR, Ariano RE, Toovey S79. Leibovici L, Shraga I, Drucker M et al retrospective analysis. Antimicrob (2010) The use of antiviral agents for (1998) The beneﬁt of appropriate Agents Chemother 54:1742–1748 the management of severe inﬂuenza. empirical antibiotic treatment in 89. Al-Hassan MN, Wilson JW, Lahr BD Crit Care Med 38(Suppl 4):e43–e51 patients with bloodstream infection. et al (2009) Beta-lactam and 100. Fiore AE, Fry A, Shay D et al (2011) J Intern Med 244:379–386 ﬂuoroquinolone combination Antiviral agents for the treatment and80. Ibrahim EH, Sherman G, Ward S et al antibiotic therapy for bacteremia chemoprophylaxis of inﬂuenza: (2000) The inﬂuence of inadequate caused by gram-negative bacilli. recommendations of the Advisory antimicrobial treatment of Antimicrob Agents Chemother Committee on Immunization Practices bloodstream infections on patient 53:1386–1394 (ACIP). MMWR Recomm Rep outcomes in the ICU setting. Chest 90. Klastersky J (2004) Management of 60:1–24 118:146–155 fever in neutropenic patients with 101. Kalil A (2008) A silent killer:81. Ali MZ, Goetz MB (1997) A meta- different risks of complications. Clin cytomegalovirus infection in the non- analysis of the relative efﬁcacy and Infect Dis 39(Suppl 1):S32–S37 immunocompromised critically ill toxicity of single daily dosing versus 91. Martin-Loeches I, Lisboa T, patient. Crit Care Med 36:3261–3264 multiple daily dosing of Rodriguez A et al (2010) Combination 102. Ziemann M, Sedemund-Adib B, aminoglycosides. Clin Infect Dis antibiotic therapy with macrolides Reibland P et al (2008) Increased 24:796–809 improves survival in intubated patients mortality in long-term intensive care with community-acquired pneumonia. patients with active cytomegalovirus Intensive Care Med 36:612–620 infection. Crit Care Med 36:3145–3150
213103. Hotchkiss RS, Opal SM (2010) 116. de Jonge E, Schultz MJ, Spanjaard L 127. McIntyre LA, Fergusson D, Cook DJ Immunotherapy for sepsis: a new et al (2003) Effects of selective et al (2008) Fluid resuscitation in the approach against an ancient foe. decontamination of the digestive tract management of early septic shock N Engl J Med 363:87–89 on mortality and acquisition of (FINESS): a randomized controlled104. Miller GG, Dummer JS (2007) Herpes resistance bacteria on intensive care: a feasibility trial. Can J Anaesth simplex and varicella zoster viruses: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 55:819–826 forgotten but not gone. Am J Transpl 362:1011–1016 128. Brunkhorst FM, Engel C, Bloos F et al 7:741–747 117. de Smet AMGA, Kluytmans JAJM, (2008) Intensive insulin therapy and105. Jimenez MF, Marshall JC (2001) Cooper BS et al (2009) pentastarch resuscitation in severe Source control in the management of Decontamination of the digestive tract sepsis. N Engl J Med 358:125–139 sepsis. Intensive Care Med 27:S49– and oropharynx in ICU patients. 129. Finfer S, Bellomo R, Boyce N et al S62 N Engl J Med 360:20–31 (2004) A comparison of albumin and106. Moss RL, Musemeche CA, Kosloske 118. Cuthbertson BH, Francis J, Campbell saline for ﬂuid resuscitation in the AM (1996) Necrotizing fascitis in MK et al (2010) A study of the intensive care unit. N Engl J Med children: prompt recognition and perceived risks, beneﬁts and barriers to 350:2247–2256 aggressive therapy improve survival. the use of SDD in adult critical care 130. Delaney AP, Dan A, McCaffrey J et al J Pediatr Surg 31:1142–1146 units (SuDDICU study). Trials 11:117 (2011) The role of albumin as a107. Boyer A, Vargas F, Coste F et al 119. de Smet AMGA, Kluytmans JAJM, resuscitation ﬂuid for patients with (2009) Inﬂuence of surgical treatment Blok HEM et al (2011) Selective sepsis: a systematic review and meta- on mortality from necrotizing soft digestive tract decontamination and analysis. Crit Care Med 39:386–391 tissue infections requiring intensive selective oropharyngeal 131. Marik PE, Teboul JL (2011) care management. Intensive Care Med decontamination and antibiotic Hemodynamic parameters to guide 35:847–853 resistance in patients in the intensive ﬂuid therapy. Ann Intensive Care 1:1108. Bufalari A, Giustozzi G, Moggi L care unit: an open label, cluster 132. Marik PE, Cavallazzi R, Vasu T et al (1996) Postoperative intraabdominal grouped, randomized cross over study. (2009) Dynamic changes in arterial abscesses: percutaneous versus Lancet Infect Dis 11:372–380 waveform derived variables and ﬂuid surgical treatment. Acta Chir Belg 120. Oostdijk EAN, de Smet AMGA, Blok responsiveness in mechanically 96:197–200 HEM et al (2010) Ecological effects of ventilated patients: a systematic109. O’Grady NP, Alexander M, Dellinger selective decontamination on resistant review of the literature. Crit Care Med EP et al (2002) Guidelines for the gram-negative bacterial colonization. 37:2642–2647 prevention of intravascular catheter- Am J Respir Crit Care Med 133. Hollenberg SM, Ahrens TS, Annane D related infections. MMWR Recomm 181:452–457 et al (2004) Practice parameters for Rep 51:1–29 ´ 121. Ochoa-Ardila ME, Garcıa-Canas A, ˜ hemodynamic support of sepsis in110. O’Grady NP, Alexander M, Dellinger ´ Gomez-Mediavilla K et al (2011) adult patients: 2004 update. Crit Care EP et al (2002) Guidelines for the Long-term use of selective Med 32:1928–1948 prevention of intravascular catheter- decontamination of the digestive tract 134. LeDoux D, Astiz ME, Carpati CM related infections. Clin Infect Dis does not increase antibiotic resistance: et al (2000) Effects of perfusion 35:1281–1307 a 5-year prospective cohort study. pressure on tissue perfusion in septic111. Mier J, Leon EL, Castillo A et al Intensive Care Med 37:1458–1465 shock. Crit Care Med 28:2729–2732 (1997) Early versus late necrosectomy 122. Guidet B, Martinet O, Boulain T et al 135. Martin C, Papazian L, Perrin G et al in severe necrotizing pancreatitis. Am (2012) Assessment of hemodynamic (1993) Norepinephrine or dopamine J Surg 173:71–75 efﬁcacy and safety of 6% for the treatment of hyperdynamic112. van Santvoort HC, Besselink MG, hydroxyethylstarch 130/0.4 vs 0.9% septic shock? Chest 103:1826–1831 Bakker OJ et al (2010) A step-up NaCl ﬂuid replacement in patients 136. Martin C, Viviand X, Leone M et al approach or open necrosectomy for with severe sepsis: the CRYSTMAS (2000) Effect of norepinephrine on the necrotizing pancreatitis. N Engl J Med study. Crit Care 16:R94 outcome of septic shock. Crit Care 362:1491–1502 123. Perner A, Haase N, Guttormsen AB Med 28:2758–2765113. Evans A, Winslow BH (1995) Oxygen et al (2012) Hydroxyethyl starch 137. De Backer D, Creteur J, Silva E et al saturation and hemodynamic response 130/0.42 versus Ringer’s acetate in (2003) Effects of dopamine, in critically ill mechanically ventilated severe sepsis. N Engl J Med norepinephrine, and epinephrine on adults during intra hospital transport. 367:124–134 the splanchnic circulation in septic Am J Crit Care 4:106–111 124. Myburgh JA, Finfer S, Bellomo R et al shock: which is best? Crit Care Med114. Aitken LM, Williams G, Harvey M (2012) Hydroxyethyl starch or saline 31:1659–1667 et al (2011) Nursing considerations to for ﬂuid resuscitation in intensive care. 138. Day NP, Phu NH, Bethell DP et al complement the Surviving Sepsis N Engl J Med. doi: (1996) The effects of dopamine and Campaign. Crit Care Med 10.1056/NEJMoa1209759 adrenaline infusions on acid-base 39:1800–1818 125. Perel P, Roberts I (2011) Colloids balance and systemic haemodynamics115. Liberati A, D’Amico R, Pifferi S et al versus crystalloids for ﬂuid in severe infection. Lancet (2010) Antibiotic prophylaxis to resuscitation in critically ill patients. 348:219–223 reduce respiratory tract infections and Cochrane Database Syst Rev 139. Le Tulzo Y, Seguin P, Gacouin A et al mortality in adults receiving intensive (3):CD000567 (Review) (1997) Effects of epinephrine on right care. Cochrane Collab 9:1–72 126. Schortgen F, Lacherade JC, Bruneel F ventricular function in patients with et al (2001) Effects of hydroxyethyl severe septic shock and right starch and gelatin on renal function in ventricular failure: a preliminary severe sepsis: a multicentre descriptive study. Intensive Care Med randomised study. Lancet 23:664–670 357:911–916
214140. Bollaert PE, Bauer P, Audibert G et al 153. De Backer D, Aldecoa C, Njimi H ¨ 167. Dunser MW, Mayr AJ, Tura A et al (1990) Effects of epinephrine on et al (2012) Dopamine versus (2003) Ischemic skin lesions as a hemodynamics and oxygen norepinephrine in the treatment of complication of continuous metabolism in dopamine-resistant septic shock: a meta-analysis. Crit vasopressin infusion in catecholamine- septic shock. Chest 98:949–953 Care 40:725–730 resistant vasodilatory shock: incidence141. Zhou SX, Qiu HB, Huang YZ et al 154. Seguin P, Bellissant E, Le-Tulzo Y and risk factors. Crit Care Med (2002) Effects of norepinephrine, et al (2002) Effects of epinephrine 31:1394–1398 epinephrine, and norepinephrine- compared with the combination of ` 168. Albanese J, Leone M, Delmas A et al dobutamine on systemic and gastric dobutamine and norepinephrine on (2005) Terlipressin or norepinephrine mucosal oxygenation in septic shock. gastric perfusion in septic shock. Clin in hyperdynamic septic shock: a Acta Pharm Sin 23:654–658 Pharmacol Ther 71:381–388 prospective, randomized study. Crit142. Levy B, Bollaert PE, Charpentier C 155. Myburgh JA, Higgins A, Jovanovska Care Med 33:1897–1902 et al (1997) Comparison of A et al (2008) A comparison of 169. Morelli A, Ertmer C, Lange M et al norepinephrine and dobutamine to epinephrine and norepinephrine in (2008) Effects of short-term epinephrine for hemodynamics, lactate critically ill patients. Intensive Care simultaneous infusion of dobutamine metabolism, and gastric tonometric Med 34:2226–2234 and terlipressin in patients with septic variables in septic shock: a 156. Morelli A, Ertmer C, Rehberg S et al shock: the DOBUPRESS study. Br J prospective, randomized study. (2008) Phenylephrine versus Anesth 100:494–503 Intensive Care Med 23:282–287 norepinephrine for initial 170. Morelli A, Ertmer C, Rehberg S et al143. Mackenzie SJ, Kapadia F, Nimmo GR hemodynamic support of patients with (2009) Continuous terlipressin versus et al (1991) Adrenaline in treatment of septic shock: a randomized, controlled vasopressin infusion in septic shock septic shock: effects on trial. Crit Care 12:R143 (TERLIVAP): a randomized, haemodynamics and oxygen transport. 157. Landry DW, Levin HR, Gallant EM controlled pilot study. Crit Care Intensive Care Med 17:36–39 et al (1997) Vasopressin deﬁciency 13:R130144. Moran JL, O’Fathartaigh MS, Peisach contributes to the vasodilation of 171. Bellomo R, Chapman M, Finfer S et al AR et al (1993) Epinephrine as an septic shock. Circulation (2000) Low-dose dopamine in patients inotropic agent in septic shock: a dose- 95:1122–1125 with early renal dysfunction: a proﬁle analysis. Crit Care Med 158. Patel BM, Chittock DR, Russell JA placebo-controlled randomised trial. 21:70–77 et al (2002) Beneﬁcial effects of short- Australian and New Zealand Intensive145. Yamazaki T, Shimada Y, Taenaka N term vasopressin infusion during Care Society (ANZICS) Clinical et al (1982) Circulatory responses to severe septic shock. Anesthesiology Trials Group. Lancet 356:2139–2143 after loading with phenylephrine in 96:576–582 172. Kellum J, Decker J (2001) Use of hyperdynamic sepsis. Crit Care Med ¨ 159. Dunser MW, Mayr AJ, Ulmer H et al dopamine in acute renal failure: a 10:432–435 (2003) Arginine vasopressin in meta-analysis. Crit Care Med146. Gregory JS, Bonﬁglio MF, Dasta JF advanced vasodilatory shock: a 29:1526–1531 et al (1991) Experience with prospective, randomized, controlled 173. Gattinoni L, Brazzi L, Pelosi P et al phenylephrine as a component of the study. Circulation 107:2313–2319 (1995) A trial of goal-oriented pharmacologic support of septic 160. Holmes CL, Patel BM, Russell JA et al hemodynamic therapy in critically ill shock. Crit Care Med 19:1395–1400 (2001) Physiology of vasopressin patients. N Engl J Med147. Annane D, Vignon P, Renault A, For relevant to management of septic 333:1025–1032 the CATS Study Group et al (2007) shock. Chest 120:989–1002 174. Hayes MA, Timmins AC, Yau EHS Norepinephrine plus dobutamine 161. Malay MB, Ashton RC, Landry DW et al (1994) Elevation of systemic versus epinephrine alone for et al (1999) Low-dose vasopressin in oxygen delivery in the treatment of management of septic shock: a the treatment of vasodilatory septic critically ill patients. N Engl J Med randomized trial. Lancet 370:676–684 shock. J Trauma 47:699–705 330:1717–1722148. Regnier B, Rapin M, Gory G et al 162. Holmes CL, Walley KR, Chittock DR 175. Annane D, Sebille V, Charpentier C (1977) Haemodynamic effects of et al (2001) The effects of vasopressin et al (2002) Effect of treatment with dopamine in septic shock. Intensive on hemodynamics and renal function low doses of hydrocortisone and Care Med 3:47–53 in severe septic shock: a case series. ﬂudrocortisone on mortality in patients149. Ruokonen E, Takala J, Kari A et al Intensive Care Med 27:1416–1421 with septic shock. JAMA (1993) Regional blood ﬂow and 163. Lauzier F, Levy B, Lamarre P et al 288:862–871 oxygen transport in septic shock. Crit (2006) Vasopressin or norepinephrine 176. Briegel J, Forst H, Haller M et al Care Med 21:1296–1303 in early hyperdynamic septic shock: a (1999) Stress doses of hydrocortisone150. Marik PE, Mohedin M (1994) The randomized clinical trial. Intensive reverse hyperdynamic septic shock: a contrasting effects of dopamine and Care Med 32:1782–1789 prospective, randomized, double- norepinephrine on systemic and 164. O’Brien A, Calpp L, Singer M (2002) blind, single-center study. Crit Care splanchnic oxygen utilization in Terlipressin for norepinephrine- Med 27:723–732 hyperdynamic sepsis. JAMA resistant septic shock. Lancet 177. Bollaert PE, Charpentier C, Levy B 272:1354–1357 359:1209–1210 et al (1998) Reversal of late septic151. Patel GP, Grahe JS, Sperry M et al 165. Sharshar T, Blanchard A, Paillard M shock with supraphysiologic doses of (2010) Efﬁcacy and safety of et al (2003) Circulating vasopressin hydrocortisone. Crit Care Med dopamine versus norepinephrine in the levels in septic shock. Crit Care Med 26:645–650 management of septic shock. Shock 31:1752–1758 178. Sprung CL, Annane D, Keh D et al 33:375–380 166. Russell JA, Walley KR, Singer J et al (2008) Hydrocortisone therapy for152. De Backer D, Biston P, Devriendt J (2008) Vasopressin versus patients with septic shock. N Engl J et al (2010) Comparison of dopamine norepinephrine infusion in patients Med 358:111–124 and norepinephrine in the treatment of with septic shock. N Engl J Med shock. N Engl J Med 362:779–789 358:877–887
215179. Annane D, Bellissant E, Bollaert PE 191. Meijvis SCA, Hardemann H, 204. Abdel-Wahab OI, Healy B, Dzik WH et al (2009) Corticosteroids in the Remmelts HHF et al (2011) (2006) Effect of fresh-frozen plasma treatment of severe sepsis and septic Dexamethasone and length of hospital transfusion on prothrombin time and shock in adults: a systematic review. stay in patients with community- bleeding in patients with mild JAMA 301:2362–2375 acquired pneumonia: a randomized, coagulation abnormalities.180. Sligl WI, Milner DA Jr, Sundar S et al double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Transfusion 46:1279–1285 (2009) Safety and efﬁcacy of Lancet 377:2023–2030 205. Stanworth SJ, Walsh TS, Prescott RJ corticosteroids for the treatment of 192. Weber-Carstens S, Deja M, Bercker S et al (2011) A national study of plasma septic shock: a systematic review and et al (2007) Impact of bolus use in critical care: clinical meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis application of low-dose indications, dose, and effect on 49:93–101 hydrocortisone on glycemic control in prothrombin time. Crit Care 15:R108181. Patel GP, Balk RA (2012) Systemic septic shock patients. Intensive Care 206. Warren BL, Eid A, Singer P et al steroids in severe sepsis and septic Med 33:730–733 (2001) High-dose antithrombin III in shock. Am J Respir Crit Care Med ´ 193. Hebert PC, Wells G, Blajchman MA severe sepsis: a randomized controlled 185:133–139 et al (1999) A multicenter, trial. JAMA 286:1869–1878182. Oppert M, Schindler R, Husung C et al randomized, controlled clinical trial of 207. Wiedermann CJ, Hoffmann JN, Juers (2005) Low dose hydrocortisone transfusion in critical care. N Engl J M et al (2006) High-dose antithrombin improves shock reversal and reduces Med 340:409–417 III in the treatment of severe sepsis in cytokine levels in early hyperdynamic 194. Hajjar LA, Vincent JL, Galas FRBG patients with a high risk of death: septic shock. Crit Care Med et al (2010) Transfusion requirements efﬁcacy and safety. Crit Care Med 33:2457–2464 after cardiac surgery: the TRACS 34:285–292183. Yildiz O, Doganay M, Aygen B et al randomized controlled trial. JAMA 208. Schiffer CA, Anderson KC, Bennett (2002) Physiologic-dose steroid 304:1559–1567 CL et al (2001) Platelet transfusion for therapy in sepsis. Crit Care 6:251–259 195. Marik PE, Sibbald WJ (1993) Effect patients with cancer: clinical practice ¨184. Briegel J, Mohnle P, Sprung CL et al of stored-blood transfusion on oxygen guidelines of the American Society of (2009) Multicenter comparison of delivery in patients with sepsis. JAMA Clinical Oncology. J Clin Oncol cortisol as measured by different 269:3024–3029 19:1519–1538 methods in samples of patients with ´ 196. Lorente JA, Landın L, dePablo R et al 209. (2003) Guidelines for the use of septic shock. Intensive Care Med (1993) Effects of blood transfusion on platelet transfusions. Br J Haematol 35:2151–2156 oxygen transport variables in severe 122:10–23185. Allolio B, Dorr H, Stuttmann R et al sepsis. Crit Care Med 21:1312–1318 210. Werdan K, Pilz G, Bujdoso O et al (1985) Effect of a single bolus of 197. Fernandes CJ, Akamine N, DeMarco (2007) Score-based immunoglobulin etomidate upon eight major FVC et al (2001) Red blood cell G therapy of patients with sepsis: the corticosteroid hormone and plasma transfusion does not increase oxygen SBITS study. Crit Care Med ACTH. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) consumption in critically ill septic 35:2693–2701 22:281–286 patients. Crit Care 5:362–567 211. INIS Collaborative Group,186. Jabre P, Combes X, Lapostolle F et al 198. Corwin HL, Gettinger A, Rodriguez Brocklehurst P, Farrell B et al (2011) (2009) Etomidate versus ketamine for RM et al (1999) Efﬁcacy of Treatment of neonatal sepsis with rapid sequence intubation in acutely ill recombinant human erythropoietin in intravenous immune globulin. N Engl patients: a multicentre randomised the critically ill patient: a randomized J Med 365:1201–1211 controlled trial. Lancet 374:293–300 double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. 212. Alejandria MM, Lansang MAD, Dans187. Cuthbertson BH, Sprung CL, Annane Crit Care Med 27:2346–2350 LF et al (2002) Intravenous D et al (2009) The effects of etomidate 199. Corwin HL, Gettinger A, Pearl RG immunoglobulin for treating sepsis, on adrenal responsiveness and et al (2002) Efﬁcacy of recombinant severe sepsis and septic shock. mortality in patients with septic shock. human erythropoietin in critically ill Cochrane Database Syst Rev Intensive Care Med 35:1868–1876 patients. JAMA 28:2827–2835 (1):CD001090188. Keh D, Boehnke T, Weber-Carstens S 200. College of American Pathologists 213. Burns ER, Lee V, Rubinstein A (1991) et al (2003) Immunologic and (1994) Practice parameter for the use Treatment of septic thrombocytemia hemodynamic effects of ‘‘low-dose’’ of fresh-frozen plasma, with immune globulin. J Clin hydrocortisone in septic shock: a cryoprecipitate, and platelets. JAMA Immunol 11:363–368 double-blind, randomized, placebo 271:777–781 ¨ 214. Darenberg J, Ihendyane N, Sjolin J controlled, crossover study. Am J 201. Canadian Medical Association Expert et al (2003) Intravenous Respir Crit Care Med 167:512–520 Working Group (1997) Guidelines for immunoglobulin G therapy in189. Huh JW, Choi HS, Lim CM et al red blood cell and plasma transfusion streptococcal toxic shock syndrome: a (2011) Low-dose hydrocortisone for adults and children. Can Med European randomized, double-blind, treatment for patients with septic Assoc J 156:S1–S24 placebo-controlled trial. Clin Infect shock: a pilot study comparing 3 days 202. American Society of Dis 37:333–340 with 7 days. Respirology Anaesthesiologists Task Force on 215. Hentrich M, Fehnle K, Ostermann H 16:1088–1095 Blood Component Therapy (1996) et al (2006) IgMA-enriched190. Confalonieri M, Urbino R, Potena A Practice guidelines for blood immunoglobulin in neutropenic et al (2005) Hydrocortisone infusion component therapy. Anesthesiology patients with sepsis syndrome and for severe community-acquired 84:732–747 septic shock: a randomized, pneumonia: a preliminary randomized 203. Liumbruno GL, Bennardello F, controlled, multiple-center trial. Crit study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med Lattanzio A et al (2009) Care Med 34:1319–1325 171:242–248 Recommendations for the transfusion of plasma and platelets. Blood Transfus 7:132–150
216216. Rodriguez A, Rello J, Neira J et al 227. Wang Z, Forceville X, Van Antwerpen 238. Stewart TE, Meade MO, Cook DJ et al (2005) Effects of high-dose P et al (2009) A large-bolus injection, (1998) Evaluation of a ventilation intravenous immunoglobulin and but not continuous infusion of sodium strategy to prevent barotrauma in antibiotics on survival for severe selenite improves outcome in patients at high risk for acute sepsis undergoing surgery. Shock peritonitis. Shock 32:140–146 respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl 23:298–304 228. Bernard GR, Vincent JL, Laterre PF, J Med 338:355–361217. Pildal J, Gøtzsche PC (2004) Recombinant Human Protein C 239. Eichacker PQ, Gerstenberger EP, Polyclonal immunoglobulin for Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Banks SM et al (2002) Meta-analysis treatment of bacterial sepsis: a Sepsis (PROWESS) Study Group et al of acute lung injury and acute systematic review. Clin Infect Dis (2001) Efﬁcacy and safety of respiratory distress syndrome trials 39:38–46 recombinant human activated protein testing low tidal volumes. Am J Respir218. Laupland KB, Kirkpatrick AW, C for severe sepsis. N Engl J Med Crit Care Med 166:1510–1514 Delaney A (2007) Polyclonal 344:699–709 240. Putensen C, Theuerkauf N, Zinserling intravenous immunoglobulin for the 229. Abraham E, Laterre P-F, Garg F et al J et al (2009) Meta-analysis: treatment of severe sepsis and septic (2005) Drotrecogin alfa (activated) for ventilation strategies and outcomes of shock in critically ill adults: a adults with severe sepsis and a low the acute respiratory distress syndrome systematic review and meta-analysis. risk of death. N Engl J Med and acute lung injury. Ann Intern Med Crit Care Med 35:2686–2692 353:1332–1341 151:566–576219. Kreymann KG, de Heer G, Nierhaus A 230. Nadel S, Goldstein B, Williams MD 241. Burns KE, Adhikari NK, Slutsky AS (2007) Use of polyclonal et al (2007) Drotrecogin alfa et al (2011) Pressure and volume immunoglobulins as adjunctive (activated) in children with severe limited ventilation for the ventilatory therapy for sepsis or septic shock. Crit sepsis: a multicentre phase III management of patients with acute Care Med 35:2677–2685 randomised controlled trial. Lancet lung injury: a systematic review and220. Turgeon AF, Hutton B, Fergusson DA 369:836–843 meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 6:e14623 et al (2007) Meta-analysis: 231. 242. Tobin MJ (2000) Culmination of an intravenous immunoglobulin in http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/ era in research on the acute respiratory critically ill adult patients with sepsis. DrugSafety/DrugSafetyPodcasts/ distress syndrome. N Engl J Med Ann Intern Med 146:193–203 ucm277212.htm. Accessed 18 Dec 342:1360–1361221. Angstwurm MW, Engelmann L, 2011 243. Marini JJ, Gattinoni L (2004) Zimmermann T et al (2007) Selenium 232. Bernard GR, Artigas A, Brigham KL Ventilatory management of acute in intensive care (SIC): results of a et al (1994) The American-European respiratory distress syndrome: a prospective randomized, placebo- Consensus Conference on ARDS: consensus of two. Crit Care Med controlled, multiple-center study in deﬁnitions, mechanisms, relevant 32:250–255 patients with severe systemic outcomes, and clinical trial 244. Hager DN, Krishnan JA, Hayden DL inﬂammatory response syndrome, coordination. Am J Respir Crit Care et al (2005) Tidal volume reduction in sepsis, and septic shock. Crit Care Med 149:818–824 patients with acute lung injury when Med 35:118–126 233. Ranieri VM, Rubenfeld GD, plateau pressures are not high. Am J222. Forceville X, Laviolle B, Annane D Thompson BT et al (2012) Acute Respir Crit Care Med 172:1241–1245 et al (2007) Effects of high doses of respiratory distress syndrome: the 245. Checkley W, Brower R, Korpak A selenium, a sodium selenite, in septic Berlin deﬁnition. JAMA et al (2008) Effects of a clinical trial shock: a placebo-controlled, 307:25226–25233 on mechanical ventilation practices in randomized, double-blind, phase II 234. Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome patients with acute lung injury. Am J study. Crit Care 11:R73 Network (2000) Ventilation with Respir Crit Care Med 177:1215–1222223. Manzanares W, Biestro A, Torre MH lower tidal volumes as compared with 246. Kallet RH, Jasmer RM, Luce JM et al et al (2011) High-dose selenium traditional tidal volumes for acute lung (2000) The treatment of acidosis in reduces ventilator-associated injury and the acute respiratory acute lung injury with tris- pneumonia and illness severity in distress syndrome. N Engl J Med hydroxymethyl aminomethane critically ill patients with systemic 342:1301–1308 (THAM). Am J Respir Crit Care Med inﬂammation. Intensive Care Med 235. Amato MB, Barbas CS, Medeiros DM 161:1149–1153 37:1120–1127 et al (1998) Effect of a protective- 247. Weber T, Tschernich H, Sitzwohl C224. Berger MM, Eggimann P, Heyland ventilation strategy on mortality in the et al (2000) Tromethamine buffer DK et al (2006) Reduction of acute respiratory distress syndrome. modiﬁes the depressant effect of nosocomial pneumonia after major N Engl J Med 338:347–354 permissive hypercapnia on myocardial burns by trace element 236. Brochard L, Roudot-Thoraval F, contractility in patients with acute supplementation: aggregation of two Roupie E et al (1998) Tidal volume respiratory distress syndrome. Am J randomized trials. Crit Care 10:R153 reduction for prevention of ventilator- Respir Crit Care Med 162:1361–1365225. Mishra V, Baines M, Perry SE et al induced lung injury in acute 248. Determann RM, Royakkers A, (2007) Effect of selenium respiratory distress syndrome: the Wolthuis EK et al (2010) Ventilation supplementation on biochemical multicenter trail group on tidal volume with lower tidal volumes as compared markers and outcome in critically ill reduction in ARDS. Am J Respir Crit with conventional tidal volumes for patients. Clin Nutr 26:41–50 Care Med 158:1831–1838 patients without acute lung injury: a226. Andrews PJ, Avenell A, Noble DW 237. Brower RG, Shanholtz CB, Fessler HE preventive randomized controlled et al (2011) Randomised trial of et al (1999) Prospective, randomized, trial. Crit Care 14:R1 glutamine, selenium, or both, to controlled clinical trial comparing supplemental parenteral nutrition for traditional versus reduced tidal volume critically ill patients. BMJ 342:d1542 ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients. Crit Care Med 27:1492–1498
217249. Yilmaz M, Keegan MT, Iscimen R 259. Amato MB, Barbas CS, Medeiros DM 271. Sud S, Sud M, Friedrich JO et al et al (2007) Toward the prevention of et al (1995) Beneﬁcial effects of the (2010) High frequency oscillation in acute lung injury: protocol-guided ‘‘open lung approach’’ with low patients with acute lung injury and limitation of large tidal volume distending pressures in acute acute respiratory distress syndrome ventilation and inappropriate respiratory distress syndrome: a (ARDS): systematic review and meta- transfusion. Crit Care Med prospective randomized study on analysis. BMJ 340:c2327 35:1660–1666 mechanical ventilation. Am J Respir 272. Noah MA, Peek GJ, Finney SJ et al250. Gajic O, Dara SI, Mendez JL et al Crit Care Med 152:1835–1846 (2011) Referral to an extracorporeal (2004) Ventilator-associated lung 260. Gattinoni L, Caironi P, Cressoni M membrane oxygenation center and injury in patients without acute lung et al (2006) Lung recruitment in mortality among patients with severe injury at the onset of mechanical patients with the acute respiratory 2009 inﬂuenza A (H1N1). JAMA ventilation. Crit Care Med distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 306:1659–1668 32:1817–1824 354:1775–1786 273. Checkley W (2011) Extracorporeal251. Schultz MJ (2008) Lung-protective 261. Pipeling MR, Fan E (2010) Therapies membrane oxygenation as a ﬁrst-line mechanical ventilation with lower for refractory hypoxemia in acute treatment strategy for ARDS: is the tidal volumes in patients not suffering respiratory distress syndrome. JAMA evidence sufﬁciently strong? JAMA from acute lung injury: a review of 304:2521–2527 306:1703–1704 clinical studies. Med Sci Monit 262. Fan E, Wilcox ME, Brower RG et al 274. Peek GJ, Mugford M, Tiruvoipati R 14:RA22–RA26 (2008) Recruitment maneuvers for et al (2009) Efﬁcacy and economic252. Marini JJ, Ravenscraft SA (1992) acute lung injury: a systematic review. assessment of conventional ventilator Mean airway pressure: physiologic Am J Respir Crit Care Med support versus extracorporeal determinants and clinical 178:1156–1163 membrane oxygenation for severe importance—part 1: physiologic 263. Stocker R, Neff T, Stein S et al (1997) adult respiratory failure (CESAR): a determinants and measurements. Crit Prone positioning and low-volume multicenter randomised controlled Care Med 20:1461–1472 pressure-limited ventilation improve trial. Lancet 374:1330253. Gattinoni L, Marcolin R, Caspani ML survival in patients with severe ARDS. 275. Adhaikari NK, Burns KE, Friedrich JO et al (1985) Constant mean airway Chest 111:1008–1017 (2007) Effect of nitric oxide on pressure with different patterns of 264. Lamm WJ, Graham MM, Albert RK oxygenation and mortality in acute positive pressure breathing during the (1994) Mechanism by which the prone lung injury: systematic review and adult respiratory distress syndrome. position improves oxygenation in meta-analysis. BMJ 334:779 Bull Eur Physiopathol Respir acute lung injury. Am J Respir Crit 276. Drakulovic MB, Torres A, Bauer TT 21:275–279 Care Med 150:184–193 et al (1999) Supine body position as a254. Pesenti A, Marcolin R, Prato P et al 265. Jolliet P, Bulpa P, Chevrolet JC (1998) risk factor for nosocomial pneumonia (1985) Mean airway pressure vs. Effects of the prone position on gas in mechanically ventilated patients: a positive end-expiratory pressure exchange and hemodynamics in severe randomised trial. Lancet during mechanical ventilation. Crit acute respiratory distress syndrome. 354:1851–1858 Care Med 13:34–37 Crit Care Med 26:1977–1985 277. van Nieuwenhoven CA,255. Mercat A, Richard JC, Vielle B et al 266. Guerin C, Gaillard S, Lemasson S et al Vandenbroucke-Grauls C, van Tiel FH (2008) Positive end-expiratory (2004) Effects of systematic prone et al (2006) Feasibility and effects of pressure setting in adults with acute positioning in hypoxemic acute the semi-recumbent position to lung injury and acute respiratory respiratory failure: a randomized prevent ventilator-associated distress syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA pneumonia: a randomized study. Crit controlled trial. JAMA 299:646–655 292:2379–2387 Care Med 34:396–402256. Meade MO, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH et al 267. Taccone P, Pesenti A, Latini R et al 278. Antonelli M, Conti G, Rocco M et al (2008) Ventilation strategy using low (2009) Prone positioning in patients (1998) A comparison of noninvasive tidal volumes, recruitment maneuvers, with moderate and severe acute positive-pressure ventilation and and high positive end-expiratory respiratory distress syndrome: a conventional mechanical ventilation in pressure for acute lung injury and randomized controlled trial. JAMA patients with acute respiratory failure. acute respiratory distress syndrome: a 302:1977–1984 N Engl J Med 339:429–435 randomized controlled trial. JAMA 268. Mancebo J, Fernandez R, Blanch L 279. Ferrer M, Esquinas A, Leon M et al 299:637–645 et al (2006) A multicenter trial of (2003) Noninvasive ventilation in257. Brower RG, Lanken PN, MacIntyre N prolonged prone ventilation in severe severe hypoxemic respiratory failure: et al (2004) Higher versus lower acute respiratory distress syndrome. a randomized clinical trial. Am J positive end-expiratory pressures in Am J Respir Crit Care Med Respir Crit Care Med 168:1438–1444 patients with the acute respiratory 173:1233–1239 280. Rana S, Jenad H, Gay PC et al (2006) distress syndrome. N Engl J Med 269. Gattinoni L, Tognoni G, Pesenti A Failure of non-invasive ventilation in 351:327–336 et al (2001) Effect of prone positioning patients with acute lung injury:258. Briel M, Meade M, Mercat A et al on the survival of patients with acute observational cohort study. Crit Care (2010) Higher vs lower positive end- respiratory failure. N Engl J Med 10:R79 expiratory pressure in patients with 345:568–573 281. Domenighetti G, Moccia A, Gayer R acute lung injury and acute respiratory 270. Sud S, Friedrich JO, Taccone P et al (2008) Observational case-control distress syndrome: systematic review (2010) Prone ventilation reduces study of non-invasive ventilation in and meta-analysis. JAMA mortality in patients with acute patients with ARDS. Monaldi Arch 303:865–873 respiratory failure and severe Chest Dis 69:5–10 hypoxemia: systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med 36:585–599
218282. Ely W, Baker AB, Dunagen DP (1996) 293. Harvey S, Harrison DA, Singer M et al 304. MacLaren R, Plamondon JM, Ramsay Effect on the duration of mechanical (2005) Assessment of the clinical KB et al (2000) A prospective ventilation of identifying patients effectiveness of pulmonary artery evaluation of empiric versus protocol- capable of breathing spontaneously. catheters in management of patients in based sedation and analgesia. New Engl J Med 335:1865–1869 intensive care (PAC-man): a Pharmacotherapy 20:662–672283. Kress JP, Pohlman AS, O’Connor MF randomised controlled trial. Lancet 305. Brook AD, Ahrens TS, Schaiff R et al et al (2000) Daily interruption of 366:472–477 (1999) Effect of a nursing- sedative infusions in critically ill 294. Harvey S, Young D, Brampton W et al implemented sedation protocol on the patients undergoing mechanical (2006) Pulmonary artery catheters for duration of mechanical ventilation. ventilation. N Engl J Med adult patients in intensive care. Crit Care Med 27:2609–2615 342:1471–1477 Cochrane Database Syst Rev 306. Shehabi Y, Bellomo R, Reade MC284. Girard TD, Kress JP, Fuchs BD et al (3):CD003408 (2012) Early intensive care sedation (2008) Efﬁcacy and safety of a paired 295. Sibbald WJ, Short AK, Warshawski FJ predicts long-term mortality in sedation and ventilator weaning et al (1985) Thermal dye ventilated critically ill patients. Am J protocol for mechanically ventilated measurements of extravascular lung Respir Crit Care Med 186:724–731 patients in intensive care (awakening water in critically ill patients: 307. Strom T, Martinussen T, Toft P (2010) and breathing controlled trial): a intravascular starling forces and A protocol of no sedation for critically randomised controlled trial. Lancet extravascular lung water in the adult ill patients receiving mechanical 371:126–134 respiratory distress syndrome. Chest ventilation: a randomised trial. Lancet285. Iberti TJ, Fischer EP, Leibowitz AB 87:585–592 375:475–480 et al (1990) A multicenter study of 296. Martin GS, Mangialardi RJ, Wheeler 308. Devlin JW, Boleski G, Mlynarek M physicians’ knowledge of the AP et al (2002) Albumin and et al (1999) Motor activity assessment pulmonary artery catheter. JAMA furosemide therapy in scale: a valid and reliable sedation 264:2928–2932 hypoproteinemic patients with acute scale for use with mechanically286. Al-Kharrat T, Zarich S, Amoateng- lung injury. Crit Care Med ventilated patients in an adult surgical Adjepong Y et al (1999) Analysis of 30:2175–2182 intensive care unit. Crit Care Med observer variability in measurement of 297. Mitchell JP, Schuller D, Calandrino 27:1271–1275 pulmonary artery occlusion pressures. FS et al (1992) Improved outcome 309. De Jonghe B, Cook D, Sharshar T et al Am J Respir Crit Care Med based on ﬂuid management in ´ (1998) Groupe de reﬂexion et d’etude ´ 160:415–420 critically ill patients requiring sur les neuromyopathies en287. Connors AF Jr, McCaffree DR, Gray pulmonary artery catheterization. Am ´ reanimation: acquired neuromuscular BA (1983) Evaluation of right-heart Rev Respir Dis 145:990–998 disorders in critically ill patients: a catheterization in the critically ill 298. Schuller D, Mitchell JP, Calandrino systematic review. Intensive Care Med patient without acute myocardial FS et al (1991) Fluid balance during 24:1242–1250 infarction. N Engl J Med 308:263–267 pulmonary edema: is ﬂuid gain a 310. Kollef MH, Levy NT, Ahrens TS et al288. Osman D, Ridel C, Ray P et al (2007) marker or a cause of poor outcome? (1998) The use of continuous IV Cardiac ﬁlling pressures are not Chest 100:1068–1075 sedation is associated with appropriate to predict hemodynamic 299. National Heart, Lung, and Blood prolongation of mechanical response to volume challenge. Crit Institute Acute Respiratory Distress ventilation. Chest 114:541–548 Care Med 35:64–68 Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials 311. Mehta S, Burry L, Cook D et al (2012)289. Richard C, Warszawski J, Anguel N Network, Wiedemann HP, Wheeler SLEAP Investigators; Canadian et al (2003) Early use of the AP et al (2006) Comparison of two Critical Care Trials Group: Daily pulmonary artery catheter and ﬂuid-management strategies in acute sedation interruption in mechanically outcomes in patients with shock and lung injury. N Engl J Med ventilated critically ill patients cared acute respiratory distress syndrome: a 354:2564–2575 for with a sedation protocol: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 300. Perkins GD, McAuley DF, Thickett randomized controlled trial. JAMA 290:2713–2720 DR et al (2006) The b-agonist lung 308:1985–1992290. National Heart, Lung, and Blood injury trial (BALTI): a randomized 312. Kress JP, Vinayak AG, Levitt J et al Institute Acute Respiratory Distress placebo-controlled clinical trial. Am J (2007) Daily sedative interruption in Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Respir Crit Care Med 173:281–287 mechanically ventilated patients at Network, Wheeler AP, Bernard GR 301. Matthay MA, Brower RG, Carson S risk for coronary artery disease. Crit et al (2006) Pulmonary-artery versus et al (2011) Randomized, placebo- Care Med 35:365–371 central venous catheter to guide controlled clinical trial of an 313. Schweickert WD, Pohlman MC, treatment of acute lung injury. N Engl aerolosolized b-2 agonist for treatment Pohlman AS et al (2009) Early J Med 354:2213–2224 of acute lung injury. Am J Resp Crit physical and occupational therapy in291. Sandham JD, Hull RD, Brant RF et al Care Med 184:561–568 mechanically ventilated, critically ill (2003) A randomized, controlled trial 302. Gao Smith F, Perkins DG, Gates S patients: a randomised controlled trial. of the use of pulmonary-artery et al (2012) Effect of intravenous b-2 Lancet 373:1874–1882 catheters in high-risk surgical patients. agonist treatment on clinical outcomes 314. Klessig HT, Geiger HJ, Murray MJ et al N Engl J Med 348:5–14 in acute respiratory distress syndrome (1992) A national survey on the practice292. Shah MR, Hasselblad V, Stevenson (BALTI-2): a multicentre, randomised patterns of anesthesiologist intensivists LW et al (2005) Impact of the controlled trial. Lancet 379:229–235 in the use of muscle relaxants. Crit Care pulmonary artery catheter in critically 303. Marx WH, DeMaintenon NL, Mooney Med 20:1341–1345 ill patients: meta-analysis of KF et al (1999) Cost reduction and 315. Murray MJ, Cowen J, DeBlock H et al randomized clinical trials. JAMA outcome improvement in the intensive (2002) Clinical practice guidelines for 294:1664–1670 care unit. J Trauma 46:625–629 sustained neuromuscular blockade in (discussion 629–630) the adult critically ill patient. Crit Care Med 30:142–156
219316. Hansen-Flaschen JH, Brazinsky S, 328. Arabi YM, Dabbagh OC, Tamim HM 339. Qaseem A, Humphrey LL, Chou R Basile C et al (1991) Use of sedating (2008) Intensive versus conventional et al (2011) Use of intensive insulin drugs and neuromuscular blocking insulin therapy: a randomized therapy for the management of agents in patients requiring controlled trial in medical and surgical glycemic control in hospitalized mechanical ventilation for respiratory critically ill patients. Crit Care Med patients: a clinical practice guideline failure: a national survey. JAMA 36:3190–3197 from the American College of 266:2870–2875 329. De La Rosa GDC, Hernando Donado Physicians. Ann Intern Med317. Freebairn RC, Derrick J, Gomersall J, Restrepo AH (2008) Strict 154:260–267 CD et al (1997) Oxygen delivery, glycaemic control in patients 340. Moghissi ES, Korytkowski MT, oxygen consumption, and gastric hospitalised in a mixed medical and Dinardo M et al (2009) American intramucosal pH are not improved by a surgical intensive care unit: a Association of Clinical computer-controlled, closed-loop, randomised clinical trial. Critical Care Endocrinologists and American vecuronium infusion in severe sepsis 12:R120 Diabetes Association consensus and septic shock. Crit Care Med 330. COIITSS Study Investigators, Annane statement on inpatient glycemic 25:72–77 D, Cariou A et al (2012) control. Diabetes Care 32:1119–1131318. Papazian L, Forel JM, Gacouin A et al Corticosteroid treatment and intensive 341. Jacobi J, Bircher N, Krinsley J et al (2010) Neuromuscular blockers in insulin therapy for septic shock in (2012) Guidelines for the use of early acute respiratory distress adults: a randomized controlled trial. insulin infusion for the management of syndrome. N Engl J Med JAMA 303:341–348 hyperglycemia in critically ill patients. 363:1107–1116 331. The NICE-SUGAR Study Crit Care Med 40:3251–3276319. Forel JM, Roch A, Marin V et al Investigators (2009) Intensive versus 342. Kauffmann RM, Hayes RM, Jenkins (2006) Neuromuscular blocking agents conventional glucose control in JM et al (2011) Provision of balanced decrease inﬂammatory response in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med nutrition protects against patients presenting with acute 360:1283–1297 hypoglycemia in the critically ill respiratory distress syndrome. Crit 332. Preiser JC, Devos P, Ruiz-Santana S surgical patient. JPEN J Parenter Care Med 34:2749–2757 (2009) A prospective randomised Enteral Nutr 35:686–694320. Shapiro BA, Warren J, Egol AB et al multi-centre controlled trial on tight 343. Egi M, Bellomo R, Stachowski E et al (1995) Practice parameters for glucose control by intensive insulin (2006) Variability in blood glucose sustained neuromuscular blockade in therapy in adult intensive care units: concentrations and short-term the adult critically ill patient: an the Glucontrol study. Intensive Care mortality in critically ill patients. executive summary. Crit Care Med Med 35:1738–1748 Anesthesiology 105:233–234 23:1601–1605 333. Wiener RS, Wiener DC, Larson RJ 344. Krinsley JS (2008) Glycemic321. Meyer KC, Prielipp RC, Grossman JE (2008) Beneﬁts and risks of tight variability: a strong independent et al (1994) Prolonged weakness after glucose control in critically ill adults: predictor of mortality in critically ill infusion of atracurium in two intensive a meta-analysis. JAMA 300:933–936 patients. Crit Care Med 36:3008–3013 care unit patients. Anesth Analg 334. Griesdale DEG, de Souza RJ, van 345. Mackenzie IMJ, Whitehouse T, 78:772–774 Dam RM et al (2009) Intensive insulin Nightingale PG (2011) The metrics of322. Lacomis D, Petrella JT, Giuliani MJ therapy and mortality among critically glycaemic control in critical care. (1998) Causes of neuromuscular ill patients: a meta-analysis including Intensive Care Med 37:435–443 weakness in the intensive care unit: a NICE-SUGAR study data. CMAJ 346. Egi M, Bellomo R, Stachowski E study of ninety-two patients. Muscle 180:821–827 (2008) Blood glucose concentration Nerve 21:610–617 335. Marik PE, Preiser JC (2010) Toward and outcome of critical illness: the323. Rudis MI, Sikora CA, Angus E et al understanding tight glycemic control impact of diabetes. Crit Care Med (1997) A prospective, randomized, in the ICU: a systematic review and 36:2249–2255 controlled evaluation of peripheral metaanalysis. Chest 137:544–551 347. Krinsley JS (2009) Glycemic nerve stimulation versus standard 336. Friedrich JO, Chant C, Adhikari NKJ variability and mortality in critically clinical dosing of neuromuscular (2010) Does intensive insulin therapy ill patients: the impact of diabetes. blocking agents in critically ill really reduce mortality in critically ill J Diabetes Sci Technol 3:1292–1301 patients. Crit Care Med 25:575–583 surgical patients? A reanalysis of 348. Nichols JH (2002) Bedside testing,324. Frankel H, Jeng J, Tilly E et al (1996) meta-analytic data. Crit Care glucose monitoring, and diabetes The impact of implementation of 14:324–330 management. In: Kost GJ (ed) neuromuscular blockade monitoring 337. Kansagara D, Fu R, Freeman M et al Principles of point of care testing. standards in a surgical intensive care (2011) Intensive insulin therapy in Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, unit. Am Surg 62:503–506 hospitalized patients: a systematic Philadelphia325. Strange C, Vaughan L, Franklin C et al review. Ann Intern Med 154:268–282 349. Kanji S, Bufﬁe J, Hutton B et al (2005) (1997) Comparison of train-of-four 338. Peberdy MA, Callaway CW, Neumar Reliability of point-of-care testing for and best clinical assessment during RW et al (2010) Part 9: post-cardiac glucose measurement in critically ill continuous paralysis. Am J Respir Crit arrest care: 2010 American Heart adults. Crit Care Med 33:2778–2785 Care Med 156:1556–1561 Association guidelines for 350. Hoedemaekers CW, Klein Gunnewiek326. van den Berghe G, Wouters P, cardiopulmonary resuscitation and JM, Prinsen MA et al (2008) Accuracy Weekers F et al (2001) Intensive emergency cardiovascular care. of bedside glucose measurement from insulin therapy in critically ill patients. Circulation 122:S768–S786 three glucometers in critically ill N Engl J Med 345:1359–1367 patients. Crit Care Med 36:3062–3066327. van den Berghe G, Wilmer A, Hermans G et al (2006) Intensive insulin therapy in the medical ICU. N Engl J Med 354:449–461
220351. Khan AI, Vasquez Y, Gray J et al 362. Kruczinski K, Irvine-Bird K, ¨ 372. John S, Griesbach D, Baumgartel M (2006) The variability of results Toffelmire EB et al (1993) A et al (2001) Effects of continuous between point-of-care testing glucose comparison of continuous haemoﬁltration vs intermittent meters and the central laboratory arteriovenous hemoﬁltration and haemodialysis on systemic analyzer. Arch Pathol Lab Med intermittent hemodialysis in acute haemodynamics and splanchnic 130:1527–1532 renal failure patients in intensive care regional perfusion in septic shock352. Desachy A, Vuagnat AC, Ghazali AD unit. Am Soc Artif Intern Organs J patients: a prospective, randomized et al (2008) Accuracy of bedside 38:M778–M781 clinical trial. Nephrol Dial Transpl glucometry in critically ill patients: 363. Van Bommel EH, Bouvy ND, Sob KL 16:320–327 inﬂuence of clinical characteristics and et al (1995) Acute dialytic support for 373. Misset B, Timsit JF, Chevret S et al perfusion index. Mayo Clin Proc the critically ill: intermittent (1996) A randomized cross-over 83:400–405 hemodialysis versus continuous comparison of the hemodynamic353. Fekih Hassen M, Ayed S, Gharbi R arteriovenous hemodiaﬁltration. Am J response to intermittent hemodialysis et al (2010) Bedside capillary blood Nephrol 15:192–200 and continuous hemoﬁltration in ICU glucose measurements in critically ill 364. Guerin C, Girard R, Selli JM et al patients with acute renal failure. patients: inﬂuence of catecholamine (2002) Intermittent versus continuous Intensive Care Med 22:742–746 therapy. Diabetes Res Clin Pract renal replacement therapy for acute 374. Ronco C, Bellomo R, Homel P et al 87:87–91 renal failure in intensive care units: (2000) Effects of different doses in354. Wilson M, Weinreb J, Soo Hoo GW results from a multicenter prospective continuous venovenous (2007) Intensive insulin therapy in epidemiological survey. Intensive haemoﬁltration on outcomes of acute critical care: a review of a dozen Care Med 28:1411–1418 renal failure: a prospective protocols. Diabetes Care 365. Kellum JA, Angus DC, Johnson JP randomized trial. Lancet 356:26–30 30:1005–1011 et al (2002) Continuous versus 375. Bouman CS, Oudemans-Van Straaten355. Newton CA, Smiley D, Bode BW et al intermittent renal replacement therapy: HM, Tijssen JG et al (2002) Effects of (2010) A comparison study of a meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med early high-volume continuous continuous insulin infusion protocols 28:29–37 venovenous hemoﬁltration on survival in the medical intensive care unit: 366. Tonelli M, Manns B, Feller-Kopman and recovery of renal function in computer-guided vs. standard column- D (2002) Acute renal failure in the intensive care patients with acute renal based algorithms. J Hosp Med intensive care unit: a systematic failure: a prospective, randomized 5:432–437 review of the impact of dialytic trial. Crit Care Med 30:2205–2211356. Dortch MJ, Mowery NT, Ozdas A et al modality on mortality and renal 376. The VA/NIH Acute Renal Failure (2008) A computerized insulin recovery. Am J Kidney Dis Trial Network (2008) Intensity of infusion titration protocol improves 40:875–885 renal support in critically ill patients glucose control with less 367. Mehta RL, McDonald B, Gabbai FB with acute kidney injury. N Engl J hypoglycemia compared to a manual et al (2001) A randomized clinical trial Med 359:7–20 titration protocol in a trauma intensive of continuous versus intermittent 377. The RENAL Replacement Therapy care unit. JPEN J Parenter Enteral dialysis for acute renal failure. Kidney Study Investigators (2009) Intensity of Nutr 32:18–27 Int 60:1154–1163 continuous renal-replacement therapy357. Mauritz W, Sporn P, Schindler I et al 368. Gasparovic V, Filipovic-Greie I, in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med (1986) Acute renal failure in Merkler M et al (2003) Continuous 361:1627–1638 abdominal infection: comparison of renal replacement therapy (CRRT) or 378. Cooper DJ, Walley KR, Wiggs BR hemodialysis and continuous intermittent hemodialysis (IHD)— et al (1990) Bicarbonate does not arteriovenous and continuous what is the procedure of choice in improve hemodynamics in critically ill hemoﬁltration. Anasth Intensivther critically ill patients? Ren Fail patients who have lactic acidosis: a Nortfallmed 21:212–217 25:855–862 prospective, controlled clinical study.358. Bartlett RH, Mault JR, Dechert RE 369. Augustine JJ, Sandy D, Seifert TH Ann Intern Med 112:492–498 et al (1986) Continuous arteriovenous et al (2004) A randomized controlled 379. Mathieu D, Neviere R, Billard V et al hemoﬁltration: improved survival in trial comparing intermittent with (1991) Effects of bicarbonate therapy surgical acute renal failure. Surgery continuous dialysis in patients with on hemodynamics and tissue 100:400–408 ARF. Am J Kidney Dis 44:1000–1007 oxygenation in patients with lactic359. Kierdorf H (1991) Continuous versus 370. Uehlinger DE, Jakob SM, Ferrari P acidosis: a prospective, controlled intermittent treatment: clinical results et al (2005) Comparison of continuous clinical study. Crit Care Med in acute renal failure. Contrib Nephrol and intermittent renal replacement 19:1352–1356 93:1–12 therapy for acute renal failure. 380. Cade JF (1982) High risk of the360. Bellomo R, Mansﬁeld D, Rumble S Nephrol Dial Transpl 20:1630–1637 critically ill for venous et al (1992) Acute renal failure in 371. Vinsonneau C, Camus C, Combes A thromboembolism. Crit Care Med critical illness: conventional dialysis et al (2006) Continuous venovenous 10:448–450 versus continuous hemodiaﬁltration. haemodiaﬁltration versus intermittent 381. Halkin H, Goldberg J, Modal M et al Am Soc Artif Intern Organs J haemodialysis for acute renal failure in (1982) Reduction in mortality in 38:M654–M657 patients with multiple-organ general medical in-patients by low-361. Bellomo R, Farmer M, Parkin G et al dysfunction syndrome: a multicentre dose heparin prophylaxis. Ann Intern (1995) Severe acute renal failure: a randomised trial. Lancet 368:379–385 Med 96:561–565 comparison of acute continuous 382. Pingleton SK, Bone RC, Pingleton hemodiaﬁltration and conventional WW et al (1981) Prevention of dialytic therapy. Nephron 71:59–64 pulmonary emboli in a respiratory intensive care unit. Chest 79:647–650
221383. Belch JJ, Lowe DO, Ward AG et al 394. Douketis J, Cook D, Meade M et al 403. Basso N, Bagarani M, Materia A et al (1981) Prevention of deep vein (2008) Prophylaxis against deep vein (1981) Cimetidine and antacid thrombosis in medical patients by low- thrombosis in critically ill patients prophylaxis of acute upper dose heparin. Scott Med J 26:115–117 with severe renal insufﬁciency with gastrointestinal bleeding in high risk384. Gardlund B (1996) Randomized, the low-molecular-weight heparin patients. Am J Surg 141:339–342 controlled trial of low-dose heparin for dalteparin: an assessment of safety and 404. Bresalier RS, Grendell JH, Cello JP prevention of fatal pulmonary pharmacodynamics: the DIRECT et al (1987) Sucralfate versus titrated embolism in patients with infectious study. Arch Intern Med antacid for the prevention of acute diseases: the Heparin Prophylaxis 168:1805–1812 stress-related gastrointestinal Study Group. Lancet 347:1357–1361 395. Vanek VW (1998) Meta-analysis of hemorrhage in critically ill patients.385. Samama MM, Cohen AT, Darmon JY effectiveness of intermittent Am J Med 83:110–116 et al (1999) A comparison of pneumatic compression devices with a 405. Poleski MH, Spanier AH (1986) enoxaparin with placebo for the comparison of thigh-high to knee-high Cimetidine versus antacids in the prevention of venous sleeves. Am Surg 64:1050–1058 prevention of stress erosions in thromboembolism in acutely ill 396. Turpie AG, Hirsh J, Gent M et al critically ill patients. Am J medical patients. N Engl J Med (1989) Prevention of deep vein Gastroenterol 81:107–111 341:793–800 thrombosis in potential neurosurgical 406. Stothert JC, Simonowitz DA,386. Dahan R, Houlbert D, Caulin C et al patients: a randomized trial comparing Dellinger EP et al (1980) Randomized (1986) Prevention of deep vein graduated compression stockings prospective evaluation of cimetidine thrombosis in elderly medical in- alone or graduated compression and antacid control of gastric pH in the patients by a low molecular weight stockings plus intermittent pneumatic critically ill. Ann Surg 192:169–174 heparin: a randomized double-blind compression with control. Arch Intern 407. Cook DJ, Fuller HD, Guyatt GH et al trial. Haemostasis 16:159–164 Med 149:679–681 (1994) Risk factors for gastrointestinal387. Hirsch DR, Ingenito EP, Goldhaber 397. Agu O, Hamilton G, Baker D (1999) bleeding in critically ill patients. SZ (1995) Prevalence of deep venous Graduated compression stocking in the N Engl J Med 330:377–381 thrombosis among patients in medical prevention of venous 408. Schuster DP, Rowley H, Feinstein S intensive care. JAMA 274:335–337 thromboembolism. Br J Surg et al (1984) Prospective evaluation of388. Fraisse F, Holzapfel L, Couland JM 86:992–1004 the risk of upper gastrointestinal et al (2000) Nadroparin in the 398. Kakkos SK, Caprini JA, Geroulakos G bleeding after admission to a medical prevention of deep vein thrombosis in et al (2008) Combined intermittent intensive care unit. Am J Med acute decompensated COPD: the pneumatic leg compression and 76:623–629 Association of Non-University pharmacological prophylaxis for 409. Kahn JM, Doctor JN, Rubenfeld GD Afﬁliated Intensive Care Specialist prevention of venous (2006) Stress ulcer prophylaxis in Physicians of France. Am J Respir Crit thromboembolism in high-risk mechanically ventilated patients: Care Med 161:1109–1114 patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev integrating evidence and judgment389. Kupfer Y, Anwar J, Seneviratne C (4): CD005258 using a decision analysis. Intensive et al (1999) Prophylaxis with 399. German Hip Arthroplasty Trial Group Care Med 32:1151–1158 subcutaneous heparin signiﬁcantly (GHAT) (1992) Prevention of deep 410. Cook DJ, Reeve BK, Guyatt GH et al reduces the incidence of deep venous vein thrombosis with low molecular- (1996) Stress ulcer prophylaxis in thrombophlebitis in the critically ill. weight heparin in patients undergoing critically ill patients: resolving Abstr Am J Crit Care Med total hip replacement: a randomized discordant meta-analyses. JAMA 159(Suppl):A519 trial. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 275:308–314390. Geerts W, Cook D, Shelby R et al 111:110–120 411. Marik P, Vasu T, Hirani A et al (2010) (2002) Venous thromboembolism and 400. Colwell CW, Spiro TE, Trowbridge Stress ulcer prophylaxis in the new its prevention in critical care. J Crit AA et al (1994) Use of enoxaparin, a millennium: a systematic review and Care 17:95–104 low-molecular-weight heparin, and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med391. Attia J, Ray JG, Cook DJ et al (2001) unfractionated heparin for the 38:222–228 Deep vein thrombosis and its prevention of deep venous thrombosis 412. Howell MD, Novack C, Grgurich P prevention in critically ill adults. Arch after elective hip replacement: a et al (2010) Iatrogenic gastric acid Intern Med 161:1268–1279 clinical trial comparing efﬁcacy and suppression and the risk of nosocomial392. PROTECT Investigators for the safety. J Bone Joint Surg Am 76:3–14 Clostridium difﬁcile infection. Arch Canadian Critical Care Trials Group 401. Geerts WH, Jay RM, Code KI et al Intern Med 170:784–790 and the Australian and New Zealand (1996) A comparison of low-dose 413. Leonard J, Marshall JK, Moayyedi P Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials heparin with low-molecular-weight (2007) Systematic review of the risk of Group, Cook D, Meade M et al (2011) heparin as prophylaxis against venous enteric infection in patients taking acid Dalteparin versus unfractionated thromboembolism after major trauma. supression. Am J Gastroenterol heparin in critically ill patients. New N Engl J Med 335:701–707 102:2047–2056 Engl J Med 364:1305–1314 402. Guyatt GH, Akl EA, Crowther M et al 414. Cook D, Guyatt G, Marshall J et al393. King CS, Holley AB, Jackson JF et al (2012) Executive summary: (1998) A comparison of sucralfate and (2007) Twice vs three times daily antithrombotic therapy and prevention ranitidine for the prevention of upper heparin dosing for thromboembolism of thrombosis, 9th ed: American gastrointestinal bleeding in patients prophylaxis in the general medical College of Chest Physicians Evidence- requiring mechanical ventilation. population: a meta-analysis. Chest Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. N Engl J Med 338:791–797 131:507–516 Chest 141(Suppl 2):7S–47S
222415. Lin P, Chang C, Hsu P et al (2010) 427. Nguyen NQ, Fraser RJ, Bryant LK 438. Braunschweig CL, Levy P, Sheean The efﬁcacy and safety of proton et al (2008) The impact of delaying PM et al (2001) Enteral compared with pump inhibitors vs histamine-2 enteral feeding on gastric emptying, parenteral nutrition: a meta-analysis. receptor antagonists for stress ulcer plasma cholecystokinin, and peptide Am J Clin Nutr 74:534–542 bleeding prophylaxis among critical YY concentrations in critically ill 439. Gramlich L, Kichian K, Pinilla J et al care patients: a meta-analysis. Crit patients. Crit Care Med 36:1469–1474 (2004) Does enteral nutrition Care Med 38:1197–1205 428. Marik PE, Zaloga GP (2001) Early compared to parenteral nutrition result416. Pongprasobchai S, Kridkratoke S, enteral nutrition in acutely ill patients: in better outcomes in critically ill adult Nopmaneejumruslers C (2009) Proton a systematic review. Crit Care Med patients? A systematic review of the pump inhibitors for the prevention of 29:2264–2270 literature. Nutrition 20:843–848 stress-related mucosal disease in 429. Heyland DK, Dhaliwal R, Drover JW 440. Dhaliwal R, Jurewitsch B, Harrietha D critically-ill patients: a meta-analysis. et al (2003) Canadian clinical practice et al (2004) Combination enteral and J Med Assoc Thai 92:632–637 guidelines for nutrition support in parenteral nutrition in critically ill417. Alhazzani W, Alshahrani M, mechanically ventilated, critically ill patients: harmful or beneﬁcial? A Moayyedi P et al (2012) Stress ulcer adult patients. JPEN J Parenter Enteral systematic review of the evidence. prophylaxis in critically ill patients: Nutr 27:355–373 Intensive Care Med 30:1666–1671 review of the evidence. Pol Arch Med 430. Doig GS, Heighes PT, Simpson F et al 441. Peter JV, Moran JL, Phillips-Hughes J Wewn 122:107–114 (2009) Early enteral nutrition, (2005) A meta-analysis of treatment418. Moore EE, Jones TN (1986) Beneﬁts provided within 24 hours of injury or outcomes of early enteral versus early of immediate jejunostomy feeding intensive care unit admission, parenteral nutrition in hospitalized after major abdominal trauma: a signiﬁcantly reduces mortality in patients. Crit Care Med 33:213–220 prospective, randomized study. critically ill patients: a meta-analysis 442. Simpson F, Doig GS (2005) Parenteral J Trauma 26:874–881 of randomised controlled trials. vs. enteral nutrition in the critically ill419. Chiarelli A, Enzi G, Casadei A et al Intensive Care Med 35:2018–2027 patient: a meta-analysis of trials using (1990) Very early nutrition 431. Taylor SJ, Fettes SB, Jewkes C et al the intention to treat principle. supplementation in burned patients. (1999) Prospective, randomized, Intensive Care Med 31:12–23 Am J Clin Nutr 51:1035–1039 controlled trial to determine the effect 443. Koretz RL, Avenell A, Lipman TO420. Eyer SD, Micon LT, Konstantinides of early enhanced enteral nutrition on et al (2007) Does enteral nutrition FN et al (1993) Early enteral feeding clinical outcome in mechanically affect clinical outcome? A systematic does not attenuate metabolic response ventilated patients suffering head review of the randomized trials. Am J after blunt trauma. J Trauma injury. Crit Care Med 27:2525–2531 Gastroenterol 102:412–429 (quiz 468) 34:639–643 432. Ibrahim EH, Mehringer L, Prentice D 444. Casaer MP, Mesotten D, Hermans G421. Chuntrasakul C, Siltharm S, et al (2002) Early versus late enteral et al (2011) Early versus late Chinswangwatanakul V et al (1996) feeding of mechanically ventilated parenteral nutrition in critically ill Early nutritional support in severe patients: results of a clinical trial. adults. N Engl J Med 365:506–517 traumatic patients. J Med Assoc Thai JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr 445. Beale RJ, Bryg DJ, Bihari DJ (1999) 79:21–26 26:174–181 Immunonutrition in the critically ill: a422. Singh G, Ram RP, Khanna SK (1998) 433. Rice TW, Mogan S, Hays MA et al systematic review of clinical outcome. Early postoperative enteral feeding in (2011) Randomized trial of initial Crit Care Med 27:2799–2805 patients with nontraumatic intestinal trophic versus full-energy enteral 446. Heyland DK, Novak F, Drover JW perforation and peritonitis. J Am Coll nutrition in mechanically ventilated et al (2001) Should immunonutrition Surg 187:142–146 patients with acute respiratory failure. become routine in critically ill423. Kompan L, Kremzar B, Gadzijev E Crit Care Med 39:967–974 patients? A systematic review of the et al (1999) Effects of early enteral 434. National Heart, Lung, and Blood evidence. JAMA 286:944–953 nutrition on intestinal permeability and Institute Acute Respiratory Distress 447. Montejo JC, Zarazaga A, Lopez- the development of multiple organ Syndrome (ARDS) Clinical Trials Martinez J et al (2003) failure after multiple injury. Intensive Network, Rice TW, Wheeler AP, Immunonutrition in the intensive care Care Med 25:157–161 Thompson BT et al (2012) Trophic vs unit: a systematic review and424. Minard G, Kudsk KA, Melton S et al full enteral feeding in patients with consensus statement. Clin Nutr (2000) Early versus delayed feeding acute lung injury: the EDEN 22:221–233 with an immune-enhancing diet in randomized trial. JAMA 137:795–803 448. Marik PE, Zaloga GP (2008) patients with severe head injuries. 435. Arabi YM, Tamim HM, Dhar GS et al Immunonutrition in critically ill JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr (2011) Permissive underfeeding and patients: a systematic review and 24:145–149 intensive insulin therapy in critically analysis of the literature. Intensive425. Pupelis G, Selga G, Austrums E et al ill patients: a randomized controlled Care Med 34:1980–1990 (2001) Jejunal feeding, even when trial. Am J Clin Nutr 93:569–577 449. Kieft H, Roos AN, van Drunen JD instituted late, improves outcomes in 436. Cerra FB, McPherson JP, et al (2005) Clinical outcome of patients with severe pancreatitis and Konstantinides FN et al (1988) Enteral immunonutrition in a heterogeneous peritonitis. Nutrition 17:91–94 nutrition does not prevent multiple intensive care population. Intensive426. Kompan L, Vidmar G, Spindler-Vesel organ failure syndrome (MOFS) after Care Med 31:524–532 A et al (2004) Is early enteral nutrition sepsis. Surgery 104:727–733 450. Tugrul S, Ozcan PE, Akinci IO et al a risk factor for gastric intolerance and 437. Heyland DK, MacDonald S, Keefe L (2004) The effects of immunonutrition pneumonia? Clin Nutr 23:527–532 et al (1998) Total parenteral nutrition on the development of nosocomial in the critically ill patient: a meta- infections and on clinical outcome in analysis. JAMA 280:2013–2019 critically ill patients [in Turkish]. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 10:89–96
223451. Radrizzani D, Bertolini G, Facchini R 462. Avenell A (2009) Hot topics in 471. Pontes-Arruda A, Aragao AM, et al (2006) Early enteral parenteral nutrition: current evidence Albuquerque JD (2006) Effects of immunonutrition vs. parenteral and ongoing trials on the use of enteral feeding with eicosapentaenoic nutrition in critically ill patients glutamine in critically ill patients and acid, gamma-linolenic acid, and without severe sepsis: a randomized patients undergoing surgery. Proc Nutr antioxidants in mechanically clinical trial. Intensive Care Med Soc 68:261–268 ventilated patients with severe sepsis 32:1191–1198 463. Tian H, Wang KF, Wu TJ (2006) and septic shock. Crit Care Med452. Bertolini G, Iapichino G, Radrizzani D Effect of total parenteral nutrition with 34:2325–2333 et al (2003) Early enteral supplementation of glutamine on the 472. Gadek JE, DeMichele SJ, Karlstad immunonutrition in patients with plasma diamine oxidase activity and D- MD et al (1999) Effect of enteral severe sepsis: results of an interim lactate content in patients with feeding with eicosapentaenoic acid, analysis of a randomized multicentre multiple organ dysfunction syndrome gamma-linolenic acid, and clinical trial. Intensive Care Med (in Chinese). Zhongguo Wei Zhong antioxidants in patients with acute 29:834–840 Bing Ji Jiu Yi Xue 18:616–618 respiratory distress syndrome. Enteral453. Suchner U, Kuhn KS, Furst P (2000) 464. Cai GL, Yan J, Yu YH et al (2006) Nutrition in ARDS Study Group. Crit The scientiﬁc basis of Inﬂuence of glutamine and growth Care Med 27:1409–1420 immunonutrition. Proc Nutr Soc hormone intensiﬁed nutrition support 473. Singer P, Theilla M, Fisher H et al 59:553–563 on immunomodulation in critically ill (2006) Beneﬁt of an enteral diet454. Santora R, Kozar RA (2010) elderly patients (in Chinese). enriched with eicosapentaenoic acid Molecular mechanisms of Zhongguo Wei Zhong Bing Ji Jiu Yi and gamma-linolenic acid in pharmaconutrients. J Surg Res Xue 18:595–598 ventilated patients with acute lung 161:288–294 465. Grau T, Bonet A, Minambres E et al injury. Crit Care Med 34:1033–1038455. Bower RH, Cerra FB, Bershadsky B (2011) The effect of L-alanyl-L- 474. Pontes-Arruda A, Martins LF, de Lima et al (1995) Early enteral glutamine dipeptide supplemented SM et al (2011) Enteral nutrition with administration of a formula (Impact) total parenteral nutrition on infectious eicosapentaenoic acid, gamma- supplemented with arginine, morbidity and insulin sensitivity in linolenic acid and antioxidants in the nucleotides, and ﬁsh oil in intensive critically ill patients. Crit Care Med early treatment of sepsis: Results from care unit patients: results of a 39:1263–1268 a multicenter, prospective, multicenter, prospective, randomized, 466. Wernerman J, Kirketeig T, Andersson randomized, double-blinded, clinical trial. Crit Care Med B et al (2011) Scandinavian glutamine controlled study: The INTERSEPT 23:436–449 trial: a pragmatic multi-centre study. Crit Care 15:R144456. Galban C, Montejo JC, Mesejo A et al randomised clinical trial of intensive 475. Rice TW, Wheeler AP, Thompson BT (2000) An immune-enhancing enteral care unit patients. Acta Anaesthesiol et al (2011) Enteral omega-3 fatty diet reduces mortality rate and Scand 55:812–818 acid, gamma-linolenic acid, and episodes of bacteremia in septic 467. Fuentes-Orozco C, Anaya-Prado R, antioxidant supplementation in acute intensive care unit patients. Crit Care Gonzalez-Ojeda A et al (2004) lung injury. JAMA 306:1574–1581 Med 28:643–648 L-alanyl-L-glutamine-supplemented 476. Stapleton RD, Martin TR, Weiss NS457. Caparros T, Lopez J, Grau T (2001) parenteral nutrition improves et al (2011) A phase II randomized Early enteral nutrition in critically ill infectious morbidity in secondary placebo-controlled trial of omega-3 patients with a high-protein diet peritonitis. Clin Nutr 23:13–21 fatty acids for the treatment of acute enriched with arginine, ﬁber, and 468. Beale RJ, Sherry T, Lei K et al (2008) lung injury. Crit Care Med antioxidants compared with a standard Early enteral supplementation with 39:1655–1662 high-protein diet: the effect on key pharmaconutrients improves 477. Grau-Carmona T, Moran-Garcia V, nosocomial infections and outcome. sequential organ failure assessment Garcia-de-Lorenzo A et al (2011) JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr score in critically ill patients with Effect of an enteral diet enriched with 25:299–308 sepsis: outcome of a randomized, eicosapentaenoic acid, gamma-458. Preiser JC, Berre PJ, Van Gossum A controlled, double-blind trial. Crit linolenic acid and anti-oxidants on the et al (2001) Metabolic effects of Care Med 36:131–144 outcome of mechanically ventilated, arginine addition to the enteral feeding 469. Trial of glutamine and antioxidant critically ill, septic patients. Clin Nutr of critically ill patients. JPEN J supplementation in critically ill 30:578–584 Parenter Enteral Nutr 25:182–187 patients (REDOXS). 478. Friesecke S, Lotze C, Kohler J et al459. Novak F, Heyland DK, Avenell A et al http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/ (2008) Fish oil supplementation in the (2002) Glutamine supplementation in show/NCT00133978?term= parenteral nutrition of critically ill serious illness: a systematic review of NCT00133978&rank=1 medical patients: a randomised the evidence. Crit Care Med 470. Pontes-Arruda A, Demichele S, Seth controlled trial. Intensive Care Med 30:2022–2029 A et al (2008) The use of an 34:1411–1420460. Avenell A (2006) Glutamine in critical inﬂammation-modulating diet in 479. Barbosa VM, Miles EA, Calhau C et al care: current evidence from systematic patients with acute lung injury or acute (2010) Effects of a ﬁsh oil containing reviews. Proc Nutr Soc 65:236–241 respiratory distress syndrome: a meta- lipid emulsion on plasma phospholipid461. Jiang H, Chen W, Hu W et al (2009) analysis of outcome data. JPEN J fatty acids, inﬂammatory markers, and The impact of glutamine-enhanced Parenter Enteral Nutr 32:596–605 clinical outcomes in septic patients: a enteral nutrition on clinical outcome randomized, controlled clinical trial. of patients with critical illness: a Crit Care 14:R5 systematic review of randomized controlled trials (in Chinese). Zhonghua Shao Shang Za Zhi 25:325–330
224480. Gupta A, Govil D, Bhatnagar S et al 492. Lautrette A, Darmon M, Megarbane B 505. den Brinker M, Joosten KFM, Lime O (2011) Efﬁcacy and safety of et al (2007) A communication strategy et al (2005) Adrenal insufﬁciency in parenteral omega 3 fatty acids in and brochure for relatives of patients meningococcal sepsis: bioavailable ventilated patients with acute lung dying in the ICU. N Engl J Med cortisol levels and impact of injury. Indian J Crit Care Med 356:469–478 interleukin-6 levels and intubation 15:108–113 493. Norton SA, Hogan LA, Holloway RG with etomidate on adrenal function481. Thompson BT, Cox PN, Antonelli M et al (2007) Proactive palliative care in and mortality. Clin Endocrinol Metab et al (2004) Challenges in end-of-life the medical intensive care unit: effect 90:5110–5117 care in the ICU: statement of the 5th on length of stay for selected high-risk 506. Han YY, Carcillo JA, Dragotta MA international consensus conference in patients. Crit Care Med 35:1530–1535 et al (2003) Early reversal of pediatric- critical care: Brussels, Belgium, April 494. Scheunemann LP, McDevitt M, neonatal septic shock by community 2003: executive summary. Crit Care Carson SS et al (2011) Randomized physicians is associated with improved Med 32:1781–1784 controlled trials of interventions to outcome. Pediatrics 112:793–799482. Sprung CL, Cohen SL, Sjokvist P et al improve communication in intensive 507. Carcillo JA, Kuch BA, Han YY et al (2003) End of life practices in care: a systematic review. Chest (2009) Mortality and functional European intensive care units: the 139:543–554 morbidity after use of PALS/APLS by Ethicus Study. JAMA 290:790–797 495. Davidson J, Powers K, Hedayat K et al community physicians. Pediatrics483. White DB, Engelberg RA, Wenrich (2007) Clinical practice guidelines for 124:500–508 MD et al (2010) The language of support of the family in the patient- ´ 508. Oliveira CF, Nogueira de Sa FR, prognostication in the intensive care centered intensive care unit: american Oliveira DS et al (2008) Time- and units. Med Decis Making 30:76–83 College of Critical Care Medicine ﬂuid-sensitive resuscitation for484. Nelson JE, Bassett R, Boss RD et al Task Force. Crit Care Med hemodynamic support of children in (2010) Models for structuring a 35:605–622 septic shock: barriers to the clinical initiative to enhance palliative 496. Curtis JR, Treece PD, Nielsen EL et al implementation of the American care in the intensive care unit: a report (2008) Integrating palliative and College of Critical Care Medicine/ from the IPAL-ICU Project critical care: evaluation of a quality- Pediatric Advanced Life Support (improving palliative care in the ICU). improvement intervention. Am J Guidelines in a pediatric intensive care Crit Care Med 38:1765–1772 Respir Crit Care Med 178:269–275 unit in a developing world. Pediatr485. Evans LR, Boyd EA, Malvar G et al 497. Odetola FO, Gebremariam A, Freed Emerg Care 24:810–815 (2009) Surrogate decision-makers’ GL (2007) Patient and hospital 509. Raimer PL, Han YY, Weber MS et al perspectives on discussing prognosis correlates of clinical outcomes and (2011) A normal capillary reﬁll time in the face of uncertainty. Am J Respir resource utilization in severe pediatric of B2 seconds is associated with Crit Care Med 179:48–53 sepsis. Pediatrics 119:487–494 superior vena cava oxygen saturations486. Lee Char SJ, Evans LR, Malvar GL 498. Typpo KV, Petersen NJ, Hallman DM of C70%. J Pediatr 158:968–972 et al (2010) A randomized trial of two et al (2009) Day 1 multiple organ 510. Brierly J, Carcillo JA, Choong K et al methods to disclose prognosis to dysfunction syndrome is associated (2009) Clinical practice parameters for surrogate decision makers in intensive with poor functional outcome and hemodynamic support of pediatric and care units. Am J Respir Crit Care Med mortality in the pediatric intensive neonatal patients in septic shock: 2007 182:905–909 care unit. Pediatr Crit Care Med update from the American College of487. Azoulay E, Metnizt B, Sprung CL et al 10:562–570 Critical Care Medicine. Crit Care Med (2009) End-of-life practices in 282 499. Kissoon N, Carcillo J, Espinosa V et al 37:666–688 intensive care units: data from the (2011) Global sepsis initiative. Pediatr 511. de Oliveira CF, de Oliveira DS, SAPS 3 database. Int Care Med Crit Care Med 12:494–503 Gottschald AF et al (2008) ACCM/ 35:623–630 500. Goldstein B, Giroir B, Randolph A PALS haemodynamic support488. Azoulay E, Timsit JF, Sprung CL et al (2005) International pediatric sepsis guidelines for paediatric septic shock: (2009) Prevalence and factors of consensus conference: deﬁnitions for an outcomes comparison with and intensive care unit conﬂicts: the sepsis and organ dysfunction in without monitoring central venous Conﬂicus study. A J Resp Crit Care pediatrics. Pediatr Crit Care Med oxygen saturation. Intensive Care Med Med 180:854–860 6:2–8 34:1065–1075489. Bertolini G, Boffelli S, Malacarne P 501. Kuch BA, Carcillo JA, Han YY et al 512. Inwald DP, Tasker RC, Peters MJ et al et al (2010) End-of-life decision (2005) Deﬁnitions of pediatric septic (2009) Paediatric Intensive Care making and quality of ICU shock. Pediatr Crit Care Med 6:501 Society sepsis audit. Arch Dis Child performance: an observational study in 502. Cam BV, Tuan DT, Fonsmark L et al 94:348–353 84 Italian units. Int Care Med (2002) Randomized comparison of 513. Malbrain ML, De laet I, Cheatham M 36:1495–1504 oxygen mask treatment vs nasal (2007) Consensus conference490. Detering KM, Hancock AD, Reade continuous positive airway pressure in deﬁnitions and recommendations on MC et al (2010) The impact of dengue shock syndrome with acute intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) advance care planning on end of life respiratory failure. J Trop Pediatr and the abdominal compartment care in elderly patients: randomised 48:335–339 syndrome (ACS): the long road to the controlled trial. BMJ 340:c1345 503. Duke T, Frank D, Mgone J (2000) ﬁnal publications, how did we get491. Marchare Delgado E, Callahan A, Hypoxaemia in children with severe there? Acta Clin Belg (Suppl):54–59 Paganelli G et al (2009) pneumonia in Papua New Guinea. Int Multidisciplinary family meetings in J TB Lung Dis 5:511–519 the ICU facilitate end-of-life decision 504. Pollard AJ, Britto J, Nadel S et al making. Am J Hosp Palliat Care (1999) Emergency management of 26:295–302 meningococcal disease. Arch Dis Child 80:290–296
225514. Cheatham ML, Malbrain ML, ´ ˜ 524. Rodrıguez-Nunez A, Dosil-Gallardo S, 536. Gwynne-Jones DP, Stott NS (1999) Kirkpatrick A et al (2007) Results Jordan I et al (2011) Clinical Community-acquired methicillin- from the international conference of characteristics of children with group resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a experts on intra-abdominal A streptococcal toxic shock syndrome cause of musculoskeletal sepsis in hypertension and abdominal admitted to pediatric intensive care children. J Pediatr Orthop 19:413–416 compartment syndrome—part II: units. Eur J Pediatr 170:639–644 537. Wu MH, Tseng YL, Lin MY et al recommendations. Intensive Care Med 525. Paganini HR, Della Latta P, Soto A (1997) Surgical treatment of pediatric 33:951–962 et al (2010) Community-acquired lung abscess. Pediatr Surg Int515. Rollins MD, Vogler SA, Mills MK Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: 17 12:293–295 et al (2010) Decompressive years of experience in Argentine 538. Murphy JJ, Granger R, Blair GK et al laparotomy for abdominal children (in Spanish). Arch Argent (1995) Necrotizing fasciitis in compartment syndrome in children: Pediatr 108:311–317 childhood. J Pediatr Surg before it is too late. J Pediatr Surg 526. Tilanus AM, de Geus HR, Rijnders BJ 30:1131–1134 45:1324–1329 et al (2010) Severe group A 539. Jaber MR, Olafsson S, Fung WL et al516. Amado VM, Vilela GP, Queiroz A Jr streptococcal toxic shock syndrome (2008) Clinical review of the et al (2011) Effect of a quality presenting as primary peritonitis: a management of fulminant clostridium improvement intervention to decrease case report and brief review of the difﬁcile infection. Am J Gastroenterol delays in antibiotic delivery in literature. Int J Infect Dis 14(Suppl 103:3195–3203 pediatric febrile neutropenia: A pilot 3):e208–e212 540. Ananthakrishnan AN (2011) study. J Crit Care 26:103, e9–103, e12 527. Newland JG, Kearns GL (2008) Clostridium difﬁcile infection:517. Cordery RJ, Roberts CH, Cooper SJ Treatment strategies for methicillin- epidemiology, risk factors and et al (2008) Evaluation of risk factors resistant Staphylococcus aureus management. Nat Rev Gastroenterol for the acquisition of bloodstream infections in pediatrics. Paediatr Drugs Hepatol 8:17–26 infections with extended-spectrum 10:367–378 541. Olivas AD, Umanskiy K, Zuckerbraun beta-lactamase-producing Escherichia 528. Barie PS, Williams MD, McCollam JS B et al (2010) Avoiding colectomy coli and Klebsiella species in the et al (2004) Beneﬁt/risk proﬁle of during surgical management of intensive care unit: antibiotic drotrecogin alfa (activated) in surgical fulminant Clostridium difﬁcile colitis. management and clinical outcome. patients with severe sepsis. Am J Surg Surg Infect 11:299–305 J Hosp Infect 68:108–115 188:212–220 542. Ngo NT, Cao XT, Kneen R et al ´518. Ardura MI, Mejıas A, Katz KS et al 529. Barie PS, Hydo LJ, Shou J et al (2006) (2001) Acute management of dengue (2007) Daptomycin therapy for Efﬁcacy and safety of drotrecogin alfa shock syndrome: a randomized invasive gram-positive bacterial (activated) for the therapy of surgical double-blind comparison of 4 infections in children. Pediatr Infect patients with severe sepsis. Surg Infect intravenous ﬂuid regimens in the ﬁrst Dis J 26:1128–1132 7(Suppl 2):S77–S80 hour. Clin Infect Dis 32:204–213519. Corey AL, Snyder S (2008) 530. Marshall JC, Maier RV, Jimenez M 543. Willis BA, Dung NM, Loan HT et al Antibiotics in 30 minutes or less for et al (2004) Source control in the (2005) Comparison of three ﬂuid febrile neutropenic patients: a quality management of severe sepsis and solutions for resuscitation in dengue control measure in a new hospital. septic shock: an evidence-based shock syndrome. N Engl J Med J Pediatr Oncol Nurs 25:208–212 review. Crit Care Med 32(Suppl 353:877–889520. Russell NE, Pachorek RE (2000) 11):S513–S526 544. Dung NM, Day NP, Tam DT et al Clindamycin in the treatment of 531. Penington AJ, Craft RO, Tilkorn DJ (1999) Fluid replacement in dengue streptococcal and staphylococcal toxic (2007) Plastic surgery management of shock syndrome: a randomized, shock syndromes. Ann Pharmacother soft tissue loss in meningococcal double-blind comparison of four 34:936–939 septicemia: experience of the intravenous-ﬂuid regimens. Clin Infect521. Nathwani D, Morgan M, Masterton Melbourne Royal Children’s Hospital. Dis 29:787–794 RG et al (2008) Guidelines for UK Ann Plast Surg 58:308–314 545. Booy R, Habibi P, Nadel S et al (2001) practice for the diagnosis and 532. Wheeler JS, Anderson BJ, De Chalain Reduction in case fatality rate from management of methicillin-resistant TM (2003) Surgical interventions in meningococcal disease associated with Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) children with meningococcal purpura improved healthcare delivery. Arch infections presenting in the fulminans: a review of 117 procedures Dis Child 85:386–390 community. J Antimicrob Chemother in 21 children. J Pediatr Surg 546. Maat M, Buysse CM, Emonts M et al 61:976–994 38:597–603 (2007) Improved survival of children522. Gemmell CG, Edwards DI, Fraise AP 533. Jackson MA, Colombo J, Boldrey A with sepsis and purpura: effects of age, et al (2006) Guidelines for the (2003) Streptococcal fasciitis with gender and era. Crit Care 11:R112 prophylaxis and treatment of toxic shock syndrome in the pediatric 547. Cruz AT, Perry AM, Williams EA methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus patient. Orthop Nurs 22:4–8 et al (2011) Implementation of goal- aureus (MRSA) infections in the UK. 534. Xiao-Wu W, Herndon DN, Spies M directed therapy for children with J Antimicrob Chemother 57:589–608 et al (2002) Effects of delayed wound suspected sepsis in the emergency523. Cawley MJ, Briggs M, Haith LR Jr excision and grafting in severely department. Pediatrics 127:e758–e766 et al (1999) Intravenous burned children. Arch Surg 548. Kanter RK, Zimmerman JJ, Strauss immunoglobulin as adjunctive 137:1049–1054 RH et al (1986) Pediatric emergency treatment for streptococcal toxic shock 535. Haecker FM, Berger D, Schumacher U intravenous access: evaluation of a syndrome associated with necrotizing et al (2000) Peritonitis in childhood: protocol. Am J Dis Child 140:132–134 fasciitis: case report and review. aspects of pathogenesis and therapy. 549. Carcillo JA, Davis AL, Zaritsky A Pharmacotherapy 19:1094–1098 Pediatr Surg Int 16:182–188 (1991) Role of early ﬂuid resuscitation in pediatric septic shock. JAMA 266:1242–1245
226550. Ranjit S, Kissoon N, Jayakumar I 563. Irazuzta JE, Pretzlaff RK, Rowin ME 574. Bartlett RH (2007) Extracorporeal (2005) Aggressive management of (2001) Amrinone in pediatric support for septic shock. Pediatr Crit dengue shock syndrome may decrease refractory septic shock: an open-label Care Med 8:498–499 mortality rate: a suggested protocol. pharmacodynamic study. Pediatr Crit 575. Maclaren G, Butt W, Best D et al Pediatr Crit Care Med 6:412–419 Care Med 2:24–28 (2011) Central extracorporeal551. Akech S, Ledermann N, Maitland K 564. Powell KR, Sugarman LI, Eskenazi membrane oxygenation for refractory (2010) Choice of ﬂuids for AE et al (1991) Normalization of pediatric septic shock. Pediatr Crit resuscitation in children with severe plasma arginine vasopressin Care Med 12:133–136 infection and shock. Systematic concentrations when children with 576. Flagg A, Danziger-Isakov L, Foster C review. BMJ 341:c4416 meningitis are given maintenance plus et al (2010) Novel 2009 H1N1552. Santhanam I, Sangareddi S, replacement ﬂuid therapy. J Pediatr inﬂuenza virus infection requiring Venkataraman S et al (2008) A 117:515–522 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation prospective randomized controlled 565. Ringe HI, Varnholt V, Gaedicke G in a pediatric heart transplant study of two ﬂuid regimens in the (2003) Cardiac rescue with enoximone recipient. J Heart Lung Transpl initial management of septic shock in in volume and catecholamine 29:582–584 the emergency department. Pediatr refractory septic shock. Pediatr Crit 577. Kumar A, Zarychanski R, Pinto R et al Emerg Care 24:647–655 Care Med 4:471–475 (2009) Critically ill patients with 2009553. Ninis N, Phillips C, Bailey L et al 566. Morelli A, Donati A, Ertmer C et al inﬂuenza A (H1N1) infection in (2005) The role of healthcare delivery (2010) Levosimendan for resuscitating Canada. JAMA 302:1872–1879 in the outcome of meningococcal the microcirculation in patients with 578. Pizarro CF, Troster EJ, Damiani D disease in children: case-control study septic shock: a randomized controlled et al (2005) Absolute and relative of fatal and non-fatal meningococcal study. Crit Care 14:R232 adrenal insufﬁciency in children with disease in children. BMJ 330:1475 567. Namachivayam P, Crossland DS, Butt septic shock. Crit Care Med554. Thompson MJ, Ninis N, Perera R et al WW et al (2006) Early experience 33:855–859 (2006) Clinical recognition of with Levosimendan in children with 579. Riordan FA, Thomson AP, Ratcliffe meningococcal disease in children and ventricular dysfunction. Pediatr Crit JM et al (1999) Admission cortisol and adolescents. Lancet 367:397–403 Care Med 7:445–448 (Erratum in: adrenocorticotrophic hormone levels555. Ceneviva G, Paschall JA, Maffei F Pediatr Crit Care Med 2007; 8:197) in children with meningococcal et al (1998) Hemodynamic support in 568. Magliola R, Moreno G, Vassallo JC disease: evidence of adrenal ﬂuid-refractory pediatric septic shock. et al (2009) Levosimendan, a new insufﬁciency? Crit Care Med Pediatrics 102:e19 inotropic drug: experience in children 27:2257–2261556. Choong K, Bohn D, Fraser DD et al with acute heart failure (in Spanish). 580. De Kleijn ED, Joosten KF, Van Rijn B (2009) Vasopressin in pediatric Arch Argent Pediatr 107:139–145 et al (2002) Low serum cortisol in vasodilatory shock: a multicenter 569. Harris E, Schulzke SM, Patole SK combination with high randomized controlled trial. Am J (2010) Pentoxifylline in preterm adrenocorticotrophic hormone Respir Crit Care Med 180:632–639 neonates: a systematic review. concentrations is associated with poor557. Yildizdas D, Yapicioglu H, Celik U Paediatr Drugs 12:301–311 outcome in children with severe et al (2008) Terlipressin as a rescue 570. Meyer DM, Jessen ME (1997) Results meningococcal disease. Pediatr Infect therapy for catecholamine-resistant of extracorporeal membrane Dis J 21:330–336 septic shock in children. Intensive oxygenation in children with sepsis: 581. Markovitz BP, Goodman DM, Watson Care Med 34:511–517 the extracorporeal Life Support S et al (2005) A retrospective cohort558. Rodriguez-Nunez A, Lopez-Herce J, Organization. Ann Thorac Surg study of prognostic factors associated Gil-Anton J et al (2006) Tescue 63:756–761 with outcome in pediatric severe treatment with terlipressin in children 571. Goldman AP, Kerr SJ, Butt W et al sepsis: what is the role of steroids? with refractory septic shock: a clinical (1997) Extracorporeal support for Pediatr Crit Care Med 6:270–274 study. Crit Care 10:R20 intractable cardiorespiratory failure 582. Pizarro CF, Troster EJ (2007) Adrenal ´ ´˜559. Rodrıguez-Nunez A, Oulego-Erroz I, due to meningococcal disease. Lancet function in sepsis and septic shock. ´ Gil-Anton J et al (2010) Continuous 349:466–469 J Pediatr (Rio J) 83(Suppl 5):S155– terlipressin infusion as rescue 572. Skinner SC, Iocono JA, Ballard HO S162 treatment in a case series of children et al (2012) Improved survival in 583. Zimmerman JJ, Williams MD (2011) with refractory septic shock. Ann venovenous vs venoarterial Adjunctive corticosteroid therapy in Pharmacother 44:1545–1553 extracorporeal membrane oxygenation pediatric severe sepsis: observations560. Keeley SR, Bohn DJ (1988) The use of for pediatric noncardiac sepsis from the RESOLVE study. Pediatr inotropic and afterload-reducing patients: a study of the Extracorporeal Crit Care Med 12:2–8 agents in neonates. Clin Perinatol Life Support registry. J Ped Surg 584. Lacroix J, Hebert PC, Hutchison JS 15:467–489 47:63–67 et al (2007) Transfusion strategies for561. Barton P, Garcia J, Kouatli A et al 573. Domico MB, Ridout DA, Bronicki R patients in pediatric intensive care (1996) Hemodynamic effects of i.v. et al (2012) The impact of mechanical units. N Engl J Med 256:1609–1619 milrinone lactate in pediatric patients ventilation time before initiation of 585. Karam O, Tucci M, Ducruet T et al with septic shock: a prospective, extracorporeal life support on survival (2011) Ted blood cell transfusion double-blinded, randomized, placebo- in pediatric respiratory failure: a thresholds in pediatric patients with controlled, interventional study. Chest review of the extracorporeal life sepsis. Pediatr Crit Care Med 109:1302–1312 support registry. Pediatr Crit Care Med 12:512–518562. Lindsay CA, Barton P, Lawless S et al 13:16–21 586. Church GD, Matthay MA, Liu K et al (1998) Pharmacokinetics and (2009) Blood product transfusions and pharmacodynamics of milrinone clinical outcomes in pediatric patients lactate in pediatric patients with septic with acute lung injury. Pediatr Crit shock. J Pediatr 132:329–334 Care Med 10:297–302
227 ´587. Lopez-Herce Cid J, Bustinza Arriortua ´ 599. Muntean W, Schramm W, Seifried E 612. Randolph AG (2009) Management of A, Alcaraz Romero A et al (2003) et al (1998) Guideline for the use of acute lung injury and acute respiratory Treatment of septic shock with fresh-frozen plasma. Medical distress syndrome in children. Crit continuous plasma ﬁltration and Directors Advisory Committee, Care Med 37:2448–2454 hemodiaﬁltration (in Spanish). An National Blood Transfusion Council. 613. Krishnan J, Morrison W (2007) Pediatr 59:491–496 S Afr Med J 88:1344–1347 Airway pressure release ventilation: a588. Stegmayr BG, Banga R, Berggren L 600. Nguyen TC, Han YY (2011) Plasma pediatric case series. Pediatr Pulmonol et al (2003) Plasma exchange as rescue exchange therapy for thrombotic 42:83–88 therapy in multiple organ failure microangiopathies. Organogenesis 614. Ten IS, Anderson MR (2006) Is high- including acute renal failure. Crit Care 1:28–31 frequency ventilation more beneﬁcial Med 31:1730–1736 601. van Deuren M, Brandtzaeg P, van der than low-tidal volume conventional589. El-Nawawy A, Abbassy AA, El- Meer JW (2000) Update on ventilation? Respir Care Clin N Am Bordiny M et al (2004) Evaluation of meningococcal disease with emphasis 12:437–451 early detection and management of on pathogenesis and clinical 615. Rotta AT, Steinhorn DM (2006) Is disseminated intravascular coagulation management. Clin Microbiol Rev permissive hypercapnia a beneﬁcial among Alexandria University 13:144–166 strategy for pediatric acute lung pediatric intensive care patients. 602. Scharfman WB, Tillotson JR, Taft EG injury? Respir Care Clin N Am J Trop Pediatr 50:339–347 et al (1979) Plasmapheresis for 12:371–387590. Campanelli A, Kaya G, Ozsahin AH meningococcemia with disseminated 616. Ben Jaballah N, Khaldi A, Mnif K et al et al (2004) Purpura fulminans in a intravascular coagulation. N Engl J (2006) High-frequency oscillatory child as a complication of chicken pox Med 300:1277–1278 ventilation in pediatric patients with infection. Dermatology 208:262–264 603. van Deuren M, Santman FW, van acute respiratory failure. Pediatr Crit591. Muntean W (2002) Fresh frozen Dalen R et al (1992) Plasma and whole Care Med 7:362–367 plasma in the pediatric age group and blood exchange in meningococcal 617. Kam PC, Cardone D (2007) Propofol in congenital coagulation factor sepsis. Clin Infect Dis 15:424–430 infusion syndrome. Anaesthesia deﬁciency. Thromb Res 107(Suppl 604. Bjorvatn B, Bjertnaes L, Fadnes HO 62:690–701 1):S29–S32 (Review) et al (1984) Meningococcal 618. Parke TJ, Stevens JE, Rice AS et al ´ ´592. Sanchez Miralles A, Reig Saenz R, septicaemia treated with combined (1992) Metabolic acidosis and fatal Marco Vera P et al (2002) plasmapheresis and leucapheresis or myocardial failure after propofol Abnormalities in coagulation and with blood exchange. Br Med J infusion in children: ﬁve case reports. ﬁbrinolysis in septic shock with 288:439–441 BMJ 305:613–616 purpura (in Spanish). An Esp Pediatr 605. Brandtzaeg P, Sirnes K, Folsland B 619. den Brinker M, Hokken-Koelega AC, 56:99–100 et al (1985) Plasmapheresis in the Hazelzet JA et al (2008) One single593. Hazelzet JA, Risseeuw-Appel IM, treatment of severe meningococcal or dose of etomidate negatively Kornelisse RF et al (1996) Age-related pneumococcal septicaemia with DIC inﬂuences adrenocortical performance differences in outcome and severity of and ﬁbrinolysis: preliminary data on for at least 24 h in children with DIC in children with septic shock and eight patients. Scand J Clin Lab Invest meningococcal sepsis. Intensive Care purpura. Thromb Haemost 178(Suppl):53–55 Med 34:163–168 76:932–938 606. Drapkin MS, Wisch JS, Gelfand JA 620. Su F, Hammer GB (2011)594. Churchwell KB, McManus ML, Kent et al (1989) Plasmapheresis for Dexmedetomidine: pediatric P et al (1995) Intensive blood and fulminant meningococcemia. Pediatr pharmacology, clinical uses and plasma exchange for treatment of Infect Dis J 8:399–400 safety. Expert Opin Drug Saf coagulopathy in meningococcemia. 607. Schott U, Bjorsell-Ostling E (1995) 10:55–66 J Clin Apher 10:171–177 Sonoclot coagulation analysis and 621. Carcillo JA, Doughty L, Kofos D et al595. Ala FA, Greaves M, Jones J et al plasma exchange in a case of (2003) Cytochrome P450 mediated- (2009) Guidelines for the use of fresh meningococcal septicaemia. Can J drug metabolism is reduced in children frozen plasma. British Committee for Anaesth 42:64–68 with sepsis-induced multiple organ Standards in Haematology, Working 608. Mok Q, Butt W (1996) The outcome failure. Intensive Care Med Party of the Blood Transfusion Task of children admitted to intensive care 29:980–984 Force. Curr Vasc Pharmacol with meningococcal septicaemia. 622. Branco RG, Garcia PC, Piva JP et al 7:110–119 Intensive Care Med 22:259–263 (2005) Glucose level and risk of596. Meyer B, Hellstern P (2008) 609. Kumar A, Kanagasundaram NS, mortality in pediatric septic shock. Recommendations for the use of Collyns TA et al (1998) Plasma Pediatr Crit Care Med 6:470–472 therapeutic plasma. Semin Nephrol exchange and haemodiaﬁltration in 623. Faustino EV, Apkon M (2005) 28:447–456 fulminant meningococcal sepsis. Persistent hyperglycemia in critically597. Fortenberry JD (2008) Pediatric Nephrol Dial Transpl 13:484–487 ill children. J Pediatr 146:30–34 critical care management of septic 610. Muntean C, Bloodworth LL, Korn TH 624. Jeschke MG, Kulp GA, Kraft R et al shock prior to acute kidney injury (2000) Antithrombin concentrate with (2010) Intensive insulin therapy in and renal replacement therapy. Semin plasma exchange in purpura severely burned pediatric patients: a Nephrol 28:447–456 fulminans. Pediatr Crit Care Med prospective randomized trial. Am J598. O’Shaughnessy DF, Atterbury C, 1:84–87 Respir Crit Care Med 182:351–359 Bolton M et al (2002) British 611. Busund R, Koukline V, Utrobin U et al 625. Day KM, Haub N, Betts H et al (2008) Committee for Standards in (2002) Plasmapheresis in severe sepsis Hyperglycemia is associated with Haematology, Blood Transfusion Task and septic shock: a prospective, morbidity in critically ill children with Force. Practical guidelines for the randomised, controlled trial. Intensive meningococcal sepsis. Pediatr Crit clinical use of plasma. Thromb Res Care Med 28:1434–1439 Care Med 9:636–640 107(Suppl 1):S53–S57
228 ´626. Garcia Branco R, Tasker RC, Ramos 630. Santiago MJ, Lopez-Herce J, Urbano J 633. Pierce CM, Wade A, Mok Q (2000) Garcia PC et al (2007) Glycemic et al (2010) Clinical course and Heparin-bonded central venous lines control and insulin therapy in sepsis mortality risk factors in critically ill reduce thrombotic and infective and critical illness. J Pediatr (Rio J) children requiring continuous renal complications in critically ill children. 83(Suppl 5):S128–S136 replacement therapy. Intensive Care Intensive Care Med 26:967–972627. Verhoeven JJ, den Brinker M, Med 36:843–849 ¨ 634. Chaıbou M, Tucci M, Dugas MA et al Hokken-Koelega AC et al (2011) 631. Brophy PD (2008) Renal supportive (1998) Clinically signiﬁcant upper Pathophysiological aspects of therapy for pediatric acute kidney gastrointestinal bleeding acquired in a hyperglycemia in children with injury in the setting of multiorgan pediatric intensive care unit: a meningococcal sepsis and septic dysfunction syndrome/sepsis. Semin prospective study. Pediatrics shock: a prospective, observational Nephrol 28:457–469 102:933–938 cohort study. Crit Care 15:R44 632. Krafte-Jacobs B, Sivit CJ, Mejia R ¨ 635. Gauvin F, Dugas M, Chaıbou M et al628. Vlasselaers D, Milants I, Desmet L et al (1995) Catheter-related (2001) The impact of clinically et al (2009) Intensive insulin therapy thrombosis in critically ill children: signiﬁcant upper gastrointestinal for patients in paediatric intensive comparison of catheters with and bleeding in a pediatric intensive care care: a prospective, randomised without heparin bonding. J Pediatr unit. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2:294–298 controlled study. Lancet 373:547–556 126:50–54 636. Sheridan RL, Yu YM, Prelack K et al629. Foland JA, Fortenberry JD, Warshaw (1998) Maximal parenteral glucose BL et al (2004) Fluid overload before oxidation in hypermetabolic young continuous hemoﬁltration and survival children: a stable isotope study. JPEN in critically ill children: a retrospective J Parenter Enteral Nutr 22:212–216 analysis. Crit Care Med 32:1771–1776