Sepsis: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
ce
imported>Rich Farmbrough
Update tag.
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Life-threatening response to infection}}
{{Short description|Life-threatening response to infection}}
{{For|the fly|Sepsis (fly){{!}}''Sepsis'' (fly)}}
{{For|the fly|Sepsis (fly){{!}}''Sepsis'' (fly)}}
{{pp-move}}
{{pp-semi|small=yes}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=February 2018}}
{{pp-move|small=yes}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=November 2025}}
{{Infobox medical condition (new)
{{Infobox medical condition (new)
| name = Sepsis
| name = sepsis
| image = Sepsis-Mikrothomben1.JPG
| image = sepsis-Mikrothomben1.JPG
| caption = Skin blotching and inflammation caused by sepsis
| caption = Skin blotching and inflammation caused by sepsis
| field = [[Infectious disease (medical specialty)|Infectious disease]], [[critical care medicine]], [[emergency medicine]]
| field = [[infectious disease (medical specialty)|infectious disease]], [[critical care medicine]], [[emergency medicine]]
| pronounce = {{IPAc-en|ˈ|s|ɛ|p|s|ᵻ|s}}
| pronounce = {{IPAc-en|ˈ|s|ɛ|p|s|ᵻ|s}}
| symptoms = {{hlist|[[Fever]]|[[tachycardia|increased heart rate]]|[[hypotension|low blood pressure]]|[[hyperventilation|increased breathing rate]]|[[oliguria|low urine output]]| [[anuria|absent or near absent urine output]]|[[pain|severe pain]]|[[mental confusion|confusion]]<ref name=CDC2014Q/>}}
| symptoms = {{Hlist|[[Fever]]|[[tachycardia|increased heart rate]]|[[hypotension|low blood pressure]]|[[hyperventilation|increased breathing rate]]|[[oliguria|low urine output]]| [[anuria|absent or near absent urine output]]|[[pain|severe pain]]|[[mental confusion|confusion]]<ref name=CDC2014Q/>}}
| complications = {{hlist|[[Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome]]|[[organ failure|temporary, transient, or permanent organ damage]]|[[ECMO|extra corporeal membrane oxygenation]]|[[hemodialysis|blood filtration or dialysis]]}}
| complications = {{Hlist|[[Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome]]|[[organ failure|temporary, transient, or permanent organ damage]]|[[ECMO|extra corporeal membrane oxygenation]]|[[hemodialysis|blood filtration or dialysis]]}}
| onset = May be rapid (less than three hours) or prolonged (several days)
| onset = May be rapid (less than three hours) or prolonged (several days)
| duration =  
| duration =
| causes = [[immune system|Immune response]] triggered by an infection<ref name=Tint2011/><ref name=Deutschman2014/>
| causes = [[Immune system|Immune response]] triggered by an infection<ref name=Tint2011/><ref name=Deutschman2014/>
| risks = {{hlist|Young or old age|[[cancer]]|[[diabetes mellitus|diabetes]]|[[major trauma]]|[[asthma]]|[[COPD|Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease]]|[[multiple myeloma]]|[[burn]]s}}<ref name=CDC2014Q/>
| risks = {{Hlist|Young or old age|[[cancer]]|[[diabetes mellitus|diabetes]]|[[major trauma]]|[[asthma]]|[[COPD|Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease]]|[[multiple myeloma]]|[[burn]]s}}<ref name=CDC2014Q/>
| diagnosis = [[Systemic inflammatory response syndrome]] (SIRS),<ref name=Tint2011/> [[SOFA score#Quick SOFA score|qSOFA]]<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016"/>
| diagnosis = [[Systemic inflammatory response syndrome]] (SIRS),<ref name=Tint2011/> [[SOFA score#Quick SOFA score|qSOFA]]<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016"/>
| differential =  
| differential =
| prevention = [[influenza vaccination]], [[Vaccinations|vaccines]], [[pneumococcal vaccination|pneumonia vaccination]]
| prevention = [[Influenza vaccination]], [[Vaccinations|vaccines]], [[pneumococcal vaccination|pneumonia vaccination]]
| treatment = [[Intravenous fluids]], [[antimicrobial]]s, [[vasopressors]]<ref name=CDC2014Q/><ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>
| treatment = [[Intravenous fluids]], [[antimicrobial]]s, [[vasopressors]]<ref name=CDC2014Q/><ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>
| medication =  
| medication =
| prognosis = 10 to 80% risk of death;<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016"/><ref name=Jawad2012/> These mortality rates (they are for a range of conditions along a spectrum: sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock) may be lower if treated aggressively and early, depending on the organism and disease, the patient's previous health, and the abilities of the treatment location and its staff
| prognosis = Mortality: sepsis ~30%, severe sepsis ~50%, septic shock ~80%.
The mortality may be lower if treated aggressively and early, depending on the organism and disease, the patient's previous health, and the abilities of the treatment location and its staff.
| frequency = In 2017, there were 48.9 million cases and 11 million sepsis-related deaths worldwide (according to WHO)
| frequency = In 2017, there were 48.9 million cases and 11 million sepsis-related deaths worldwide (according to WHO)
| deaths =  
| deaths =
}}
}}


'''Sepsis''' is a potentially life-threatening condition that arises when the body's response to [[infection]] causes injury to its own tissues and organs.<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016"/><ref name=NEJM2013/>
'''Sepsis''' is a potentially life-threatening condition that arises when the body's dysregulated response to [[infection]] causes injury to its own tissues and organs.<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016"/><ref name=NEJM2013/>


This initial stage of sepsis is followed by suppression of the [[immune system]].<ref name="pmid31611560">{{cite journal | vauthors = Cao C, Yu M, Chai Y | title = Pathological alteration and therapeutic implications of sepsis-induced immune cell apoptosis | journal = Cell Death & Disease | volume = 10 | issue = 10 | pages = 782 | date = October 2019 | pmid = 31611560 | pmc = 6791888 | doi = 10.1038/s41419-019-2015-1 }}</ref> Common signs and symptoms include [[fever]], [[tachycardia|increased heart rate]], [[hyperventilation|increased breathing rate]], and [[mental confusion|confusion]].<ref name=CDC2014Q/> There may also be symptoms related to a specific infection, such as a cough with [[pneumonia]], or [[dysuria|painful urination]] with a [[pyelonephritis|kidney infection]].<ref name=Tint2011/> The very young, old, and people with a [[immunodeficiency|weakened immune system]] may not have any symptoms specific to their infection, and their [[hypothermia|body temperature]] may be low or normal instead of constituting a fever.<ref name=Tint2011/> Severe sepsis may cause [[organ dysfunction]] and significantly reduced blood flow.<ref name=SSCG2012>{{cite journal | vauthors = Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, Annane D, Gerlach H, Opal SM, Sevransky JE, Sprung CL, Douglas IS, Jaeschke R, Osborn TM, Nunnally ME, Townsend SR, Reinhart K, Kleinpell RM, Angus DC, Deutschman CS, Machado FR, Rubenfeld GD, Webb SA, Beale RJ, Vincent JL, Moreno R | display-authors = 6 | title = Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012 | journal = Critical Care Medicine | volume = 41 | issue = 2 | pages = 580–637 | date = February 2013 | pmid = 23353941 | doi = 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31827e83af | doi-access = free }}</ref> The presence of [[Hypotension|low blood pressure]], high blood [[Lactic acid|lactate]], or [[Oliguria|low urine output]] may suggest poor blood flow.<ref name=SSCG2012/> [[Septic shock]] is low blood pressure due to sepsis that does not improve after [[fluid replacement]].<ref name=SSCG2012/>
This initial stage of sepsis is followed by dysregulation of the [[immune system]].<ref name="pmid31611560">{{cite journal | vauthors = Cao C, Yu M, Chai Y | title = Pathological alteration and therapeutic implications of sepsis-induced immune cell apoptosis | journal = [[Cell Death & Disease]] | volume = 10 | issue = 10 | article-number = 782 | date = October 2019 | pmid = 31611560 | pmc = 6791888 | doi = 10.1038/s41419-019-2015-1 }}</ref> Common signs and symptoms include [[fever]], [[tachycardia|increased heart rate]], [[hyperventilation|increased breathing rate]], and [[mental confusion|confusion]].<ref name=CDC2014Q/> There may also be symptoms related to a specific infection, such as a cough with [[pneumonia]], or [[dysuria|painful urination]] with a [[pyelonephritis|kidney infection]].<ref name=Tint2011/> The very young, old, and people with a [[immunodeficiency|weakened immune system]] may not have any symptoms specific to their infection, and their [[hypothermia|body temperature]] may be low or normal instead of constituting a fever.<ref name=Tint2011/> Severe sepsis may cause [[organ dysfunction]] and significantly reduced blood flow.<ref name=SSCG2012>{{cite journal | vauthors = Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, Annane D, Gerlach H, Opal SM, Sevransky JE, Sprung CL, Douglas IS, Jaeschke R, Osborn TM, Nunnally ME, Townsend SR, Reinhart K, Kleinpell RM, Angus DC, Deutschman CS, Machado FR, Rubenfeld GD, Webb SA, Beale RJ, Vincent JL, Moreno R | display-authors = 6 | title = Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012 | journal = Critical Care Medicine | volume = 41 | issue = 2 | pages = 580–637 | date = February 2013 | pmid = 23353941 | doi = 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31827e83af | doi-access = free }}</ref> The presence of [[Hypotension|low blood pressure]], high blood [[Lactic acid|lactate]], or [[Oliguria|low urine output]] may suggest poor blood flow.<ref name=SSCG2012/> [[Septic shock]] is low blood pressure due to sepsis that does not improve after [[fluid replacement]] or requires [[vasopressors|medications]] to raise the blood pressure.<ref name=SSCG2012/><ref name="Meyer 2024" />


Sepsis is caused by many organisms including bacteria, viruses, and fungi.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Sehgal M, Ladd HJ, Totapally B | title = Trends in Epidemiology and Microbiology of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock in Children | journal = Hospital Pediatrics | volume = 10 | issue = 12 | pages = 1021–1030 | date = December 2020 | pmid = 33208389 | doi = 10.1542/hpeds.2020-0174 | s2cid = 227067133 | doi-access = free }}</ref> Common locations for the primary infection include the lungs, brain, [[urinary tract]], skin, and [[abdominal organs]].<ref name="Tint2011" /> Risk factors include being very young or old, a weakened immune system from conditions such as [[cancer]] or [[diabetes mellitus|diabetes]], [[major trauma]], and [[burn]]s.<ref name="CDC2014Q" /> A shortened [[SOFA score|sequential organ failure assessment score]] (SOFA score), known as the [[SOFA score#Quick SOFA score|quick SOFA score]] (qSOFA), has replaced the [[systemic inflammatory response syndrome|SIRS]] system of diagnosis.<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016" /> qSOFA criteria for sepsis include at least two of the following three: increased breathing rate, change in the level of consciousness, and low blood pressure.<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016" /> Sepsis guidelines recommend obtaining [[blood culture]]s before starting antibiotics; however, the diagnosis does not require the [[Bacteremia|blood to be infected]].<ref name="Tint2011" /> [[Medical imaging]] is helpful when looking for the possible location of the infection.<ref name="SSCG2012" /> Other potential causes of similar signs and symptoms include [[anaphylaxis]], [[adrenal insufficiency]], [[hypovolemia|low blood volume]], [[heart failure]], and [[pulmonary embolism]].<ref name="Tint2011" />
Sepsis is caused by many organisms including bacteria, viruses, and fungi.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Sehgal M, Ladd HJ, Totapally B | title = Trends in Epidemiology and Microbiology of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock in Children | journal = [[American Academy of Pediatrics|Hospital Pediatrics]] | volume = 10 | issue = 12 | pages = 1021–1030 | date = December 2020 | pmid = 33208389 | doi = 10.1542/hpeds.2020-0174 | s2cid = 227067133 | doi-access = free }}</ref> [[Gram negative]] and [[gram positive]] bacteria are the most common causes of sepsis. Viral pathogens and diarrheal illnesses are common causes in children.<ref name="Meyer 2024" /> In 60–70% of cases an infectious pathogen is found.<ref name="Meyer 2024" /> Common locations for the primary infection include the lungs, brain, [[urinary tract]], skin, and [[abdominal organs]].<ref name="Tint2011" /> Risk factors include being very young or old, a weakened immune system from conditions such as [[cancer]] or [[diabetes mellitus|diabetes]], [[major trauma]], and [[burn]]s.<ref name="CDC2014Q" /> A shortened [[SOFA score|sequential organ failure assessment score]] (SOFA score), known as the [[SOFA score#Quick SOFA score|quick SOFA score]] (qSOFA), has replaced the [[systemic inflammatory response syndrome|SIRS]] system of diagnosis.<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016" /> qSOFA criteria for sepsis include at least two of the following three: increased breathing rate, change in the level of consciousness, and low blood pressure.<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016" /> Sepsis guidelines recommend obtaining [[blood culture]]s before starting antibiotics; however, the diagnosis does not require the [[Bacteremia|blood to be infected]].<ref name="Tint2011" /> [[Medical imaging]] is helpful when looking for the possible location of the infection.<ref name="SSCG2012" /> Other potential causes of similar signs and symptoms include [[anaphylaxis]], [[adrenal insufficiency]], [[hypovolemia|low blood volume]], [[heart failure]], and [[pulmonary embolism]].<ref name="Tint2011" />


Sepsis requires immediate treatment with [[intravenous fluids]] and [[antimicrobial]] medications.<ref name="CDC2014Q" /><ref name="SSC–G2016" /> Ongoing care and stabilization often continues in an [[intensive care unit]].<ref name=CDC2014Q/> If an adequate trial of fluid replacement is not enough to maintain blood pressure, then the use of medications that [[vasopressor|raise blood pressure]] becomes necessary.<ref name=CDC2014Q/> [[Mechanical ventilation]] and [[Kidney dialysis|dialysis]] may be needed to support the function of the lungs and kidneys, respectively.<ref name=CDC2014Q/> A [[central venous catheter]] and [[arterial line]] may be placed for access to the bloodstream and to guide treatment.<ref name=SSCG2012/> Other helpful measurements include [[cardiac output]] and [[superior vena cava]] [[oxygen saturation (medicine)|oxygen saturation]].<ref name=SSCG2012/> People with sepsis need preventive measures for [[deep vein thrombosis]], [[stress ulcer]]s, and [[pressure ulcer]]s unless other conditions prevent such interventions.<ref name=SSCG2012/> Some people might benefit from tight control of [[blood sugar level]]s with [[insulin]].<ref name=SSCG2012/> The use of [[corticosteroids]] is controversial, with some reviews finding benefit,<ref name=Ann2019>{{cite journal | vauthors = Annane D, Bellissant E, Bollaert PE, Briegel J, Keh D, Kupfer Y, Pirracchio R, Rochwerg B | display-authors = 6 | title = Corticosteroids for treating sepsis in children and adults | journal = The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews | volume = 2019 | issue = 12 | pages = CD002243 | date = December 2019 | pmid = 31808551 | pmc = 6953403 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD002243.pub4 }}</ref><ref name=Fang2018/> others not.<ref name=Long2017/>
Sepsis requires immediate treatment with [[intravenous fluids]] and [[antimicrobial]] medications.<ref name="CDC2014Q" /><ref name="SSC–G2016" /> Ongoing care and stabilization often continues in an [[intensive care unit]].<ref name=CDC2014Q/> If an adequate trial of fluid replacement is not enough to maintain blood pressure, then the use of medications that [[vasopressor|raise blood pressure]] becomes necessary.<ref name=CDC2014Q/> [[Mechanical ventilation]] and [[Kidney dialysis|dialysis]] may be needed to support the function of the lungs and kidneys, respectively.<ref name=CDC2014Q/> A [[central venous catheter]] and [[arterial line]] may be placed for access to the bloodstream and to guide treatment.<ref name=SSCG2012/> Other helpful measurements include [[cardiac output]] and [[superior vena cava]] [[oxygen saturation (medicine)|oxygen saturation]].<ref name=SSCG2012/> People with sepsis need preventive measures for [[deep vein thrombosis]], [[stress ulcer]]s, and [[pressure ulcer]]s unless other conditions prevent such interventions.<ref name=SSCG2012/> Some people might benefit from tight control of [[blood sugar level]]s with [[insulin]].<ref name=SSCG2012/> The use of [[corticosteroids]] is controversial, with some reviews finding benefit,<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |last1=Annane |first1=Djillali |last2=Briegel |first2=Josef |last3=Granton |first3=David |last4=Bellissant |first4=Eric |last5=Bollaert |first5=Pierre Edouard |last6=Keh |first6=Didier |last7=Kupfer |first7=Yizhak |last8=Pirracchio |first8=Romain |last9=Rochwerg |first9=Bram |date=2025-06-05 |title=Corticosteroids for treating sepsis in children and adults |journal=[[The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews]] |volume=2025 |issue=6 |article-number=CD002243 |doi=10.1002/14651858.CD002243.pub5 |issn=1469-493X |pmc=12138977 |pmid=40470636 |pmc-embargo-date=5 June 2026 }}</ref><ref name=Fang2018/> others not.<ref name=Long2017/>


Disease severity partly determines the outcome.<ref name=Jawad2012/> The risk of death from sepsis is as high as 30%, while for severe sepsis it is as high as 50%, and the risk of death from septic shock is 80%.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Epstein L, Dantes R, Magill S, Fiore A | title = Varying Estimates of Sepsis Mortality Using Death Certificates and Administrative Codes--United States, 1999-2014 | language = en-us | journal = MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report | volume = 65 | issue = 13 | pages = 342–345 | date = April 2016 | pmid = 27054476 | doi = 10.15585/mmwr.mm6513a2 | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Desale M, Thinkhamrop J, Lumbiganon P, Qazi S, Anderson J | title = Ending preventable maternal and newborn deaths due to infection | journal = Best Practice & Research. Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology | volume = 36 | pages = 116–130 | date = October 2016 | pmid = 27450868 | doi = 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2016.05.008 }}</ref><ref name=Jawad2012>{{cite journal | vauthors = Jawad I, Lukšić I, Rafnsson SB | title = Assessing available information on the burden of sepsis: global estimates of incidence, prevalence and mortality | journal = Journal of Global Health | volume = 2 | issue = 1 | pages = 010404 | date = June 2012 | pmid = 23198133 | pmc = 3484761 | doi = 10.7189/jogh.01.010404 }}</ref> Sepsis affected about 49 million people in 2017, with 11 million deaths (1 in 5 deaths worldwide).<ref name=":0"/> In the [[developed world]], approximately 0.2 to 3 people per 1000 are affected by sepsis yearly.<ref name=Jawad2012/><ref name=Martin2012/> Rates of disease have been increasing.<ref name=SSCG2012/> Some data indicate that sepsis is more common among men than women,<ref name=Tint2011/> however, other data show a greater prevalence of the disease among women.<ref name=":0">{{cite journal | vauthors = Rudd KE, Johnson SC, Agesa KM, Shackelford KA, Tsoi D, Kievlan DR, Colombara DV, Ikuta KS, Kissoon N, Finfer S, Fleischmann-Struzek C, Machado FR, Reinhart KK, Rowan K, Seymour CW, Watson RS, West TE, Marinho F, Hay SI, Lozano R, Lopez AD, Angus DC, Murray CJ, Naghavi M | display-authors = 6 | title = Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990-2017: analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study | language = English | journal = Lancet | volume = 395 | issue = 10219 | pages = 200–211 | date = January 2020 | pmid = 31954465 | pmc = 6970225 | doi = 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32989-7 | hdl-access = free | hdl = 11343/273829 }}</ref>
A person's age, immune system function, the virulence of the pathogen causing infection, the amount of microorganisms in the body causing infection (pathogen burden) all affect the incidence, severity and prognosis of sepsis.<ref name="Meyer 2024">{{cite journal |last1=Meyer |first1=Nuala J. |last2=Prescott |first2=Hallie C. |title=Sepsis and Septic Shock |journal=[[New England Journal of Medicine]] |date=5 December 2024 |volume=391 |issue=22 |pages=2133–2146 |doi=10.1056/NEJMra2403213}}</ref><ref name=Jawad2012/> The risk of death from sepsis is as high as 30%, while for severe sepsis it is as high as 50%, and the risk of death from septic shock is 80%.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Epstein L, Dantes R, Magill S, Fiore A | title = Varying Estimates of Sepsis Mortality Using Death Certificates and Administrative Codes--United States, 1999-2014 | language = en-us | journal = MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report | volume = 65 | issue = 13 | pages = 342–345 | date = April 2016 | pmid = 27054476 | doi = 10.15585/mmwr.mm6513a2 | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Desale M, Thinkhamrop J, Lumbiganon P, Qazi S, Anderson J | title = Ending preventable maternal and newborn deaths due to infection | journal = Best Practice & Research. Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology | volume = 36 | pages = 116–130 | date = October 2016 | pmid = 27450868 | doi = 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2016.05.008 }}</ref><ref name=Jawad2012>{{cite journal | vauthors = Jawad I, Lukšić I, Rafnsson SB | title = Assessing available information on the burden of sepsis: global estimates of incidence, prevalence and mortality | journal = Journal of Global Health | volume = 2 | issue = 1 | article-number = 010404 | date = June 2012 | pmid = 23198133 | pmc = 3484761 | doi = 10.7189/jogh.01.010404 }}</ref> Sepsis affected about 49 million people in 2017, with 11 million deaths (1 in 5 deaths worldwide).<ref name=":0"/> In the [[developed world]], approximately 0.2 to 3 people per 1000 are affected by sepsis yearly.<ref name=Jawad2012/><ref name=Martin2012/> Rates of disease have been increasing.<ref name=SSCG2012/> 85% of cases occurred in low or middle income countries with 40% of cases worldwide occurring in [[Sub-Saharan Africa]].<ref name="Meyer 2024"/> Some data indicate that sepsis is more common among men than women;<ref name=Tint2011/> however, other data show a greater prevalence of the disease among women.<ref name=":0">{{cite journal | vauthors = Rudd KE, Johnson SC, Agesa KM, Shackelford KA, Tsoi D, Kievlan DR, Colombara DV, Ikuta KS, Kissoon N, Finfer S, Fleischmann-Struzek C, Machado FR, Reinhart KK, Rowan K, Seymour CW, Watson RS, West TE, Marinho F, Hay SI, Lozano R, Lopez AD, Angus DC, Murray CJ, Naghavi M | display-authors = 6 | title = Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990-2017: analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study | language = English | journal = Lancet | volume = 395 | issue = 10219 | pages = 200–211 | date = January 2020 | pmid = 31954465 | pmc = 6970225 | doi = 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32989-7 | hdl-access = free | hdl = 11343/273829 }}</ref>
[[File:En.Wikipedia-VideoWiki-Sepsis.webm|thumb|thumbtime=2:04|upright=1.4|Video summary ([[Wikipedia:VideoWiki/Sepsis|script]])]]
[[File:En.Wikipedia-VideoWiki-Sepsis.webm|thumb|thumbtime=2:04|upright=1.4|Video summary ([[Wikipedia:VideoWiki/Sepsis|script]])]]


Line 41: Line 43:
The drop in blood pressure seen in sepsis can cause [[lightheadedness]] and is part of the criteria for [[septic shock]].<ref name=MedLP/>
The drop in blood pressure seen in sepsis can cause [[lightheadedness]] and is part of the criteria for [[septic shock]].<ref name=MedLP/>


Oxidative stress is observed in septic shock, with circulating levels of copper and vitamin C being decreased.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Singer P, Blaser AR, Berger MM, Alhazzani W, Calder PC, Casaer MP, Hiesmayr M, Mayer K, Montejo JC, Pichard C, Preiser JC, van Zanten AR, Oczkowski S, Szczeklik W, Bischoff SC | display-authors = 6 | title = ESPEN guideline on clinical nutrition in the intensive care unit | journal = Clinical Nutrition | volume = 38 | issue = 1 | pages = 48–79 | date = February 2019 | pmid = 30348463 | doi = 10.1016/j.clnu.2018.08.037 | s2cid = 53036546 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
Oxidative stress is observed in septic shock, with circulating levels of copper and vitamin&nbsp;C being decreased.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Singer P, Blaser AR, Berger MM, Alhazzani W, Calder PC, Casaer MP, Hiesmayr M, Mayer K, Montejo JC, Pichard C, Preiser JC, van Zanten AR, Oczkowski S, Szczeklik W, Bischoff SC | display-authors = 6 | title = ESPEN guideline on clinical nutrition in the intensive care unit | journal = Clinical Nutrition | volume = 38 | issue = 1 | pages = 48–79 | date = February 2019 | pmid = 30348463 | doi = 10.1016/j.clnu.2018.08.037 | s2cid = 53036546 | doi-access = free }}</ref>


[[Diastolic blood pressure]] falls during the early stages of sepsis, causing a widening/increasing of [[pulse pressure]], which is the difference between the systolic and diastolic blood pressures. If sepsis becomes severe and [[hemodynamic]] compromise advances, the [[systolic pressure]] also decreases, causing a narrowing/decreasing of pulse pressure.<ref name=pedsepsis>{{cite journal |vauthors=Khilnani P, Singhi S, Lodha R, Santhanam I, Sachdev A, Chugh K, Jaishree M, Ranjit S, Ramachandran B, Ali U, Udani S, Uttam R, Deopujari S |date=January 2010 |title=Pediatric Sepsis Guidelines: Summary for resource-limited countries |journal=Indian J Crit Care Med |volume=14 |issue=1 |pages=41–52 |doi=10.4103/0972-5229.63029 |pmc=2888329 |pmid=20606908 |doi-access=free }}</ref> A pulse pressure of over 70 mmHg in patients with sepsis is correlated with an increased chance of survival.<ref name=widesepsis/> A widened pulse pressure is also correlated with an increased chance that someone with sepsis will benefit from and respond to [[Fluid replacement#Intravenous|IV fluids]].<ref name=widesepsis>{{cite journal |vauthors=Al-Khalisy H, Nikiforov I, Jhajj M, Kodali N, Cheriyath P |date=11 December 2015 |title=A widened pulse pressure: a potential valuable prognostic indicator of mortality in patients with sepsis. J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect |journal=J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect |volume=5 |issue=6 |page=29426 |doi=10.3402/jchimp.v5.29426 |pmc=4677588 |pmid=26653692 }}</ref>
[[Diastolic blood pressure]] falls during the early stages of sepsis, causing a widening/increasing of [[pulse pressure]], which is the difference between the systolic and diastolic blood pressures. If sepsis becomes severe and [[hemodynamic]] compromise advances, the [[systolic pressure]] also decreases, causing a narrowing/decreasing of pulse pressure.<ref name=pedsepsis>{{cite journal |vauthors=Khilnani P, Singhi S, Lodha R, Santhanam I, Sachdev A, Chugh K, Jaishree M, Ranjit S, Ramachandran B, Ali U, Udani S, Uttam R, Deopujari S |date=January 2010 |title=Pediatric Sepsis Guidelines: Summary for resource-limited countries |journal=Indian J Crit Care Med |volume=14 |issue=1 |pages=41–52 |doi=10.4103/0972-5229.63029 |pmc=2888329 |pmid=20606908 |doi-access=free }}</ref> A pulse pressure of over 70&nbsp;mmHg in patients with sepsis is correlated with an increased chance of survival.<ref name=widesepsis/> A widened pulse pressure is also correlated with an increased chance that someone with sepsis will benefit from and respond to [[Fluid replacement#Intravenous|IV fluids]].<ref name=widesepsis>{{cite journal |vauthors=Al-Khalisy H, Nikiforov I, Jhajj M, Kodali N, Cheriyath P |date=11 December 2015 |title=A widened pulse pressure: a potential valuable prognostic indicator of mortality in patients with sepsis. J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect |journal=J Community Hosp Intern Med Perspect |volume=5 |issue=6 |article-number=29426 |doi=10.3402/jchimp.v5.29426 |pmc=4677588 |pmid=26653692 }}</ref>


== Cause ==
== Cause ==
[[File:Patient lying in bed in intensive care unit of hospital with apparatuses and hemodialysis machine.jpg|thumb|Patient of an [[intensive care unit]] of a German hospital (2015) with severe sepsis caused by a [[chain reaction]] of incidental negative events after a prior surgery of the [[abdomen]]. After an emergency surgery, he received [[antibiotics]], [[parenteral nutrition]], and [[pain killer]]s via automated injection employing [[infusion pump]]s (background right). [[Hemodialysis]] via the machine on the left became necessary due to [[kidney]] malfunction and [[multiple organ dysfunction syndrome]]. After three months in the hospital, the patient recovered within a month and has since then fully recovered (as of 2023).]]
[[File:Patient lying in bed in intensive care unit of hospital with apparatuses and hemodialysis machine.jpg|thumb|Patient of an [[intensive care unit]] of a German hospital (2015) with severe sepsis caused by a [[chain reaction]] of incidental negative events after a prior surgery of the [[abdomen]]. After an emergency surgery, he received [[antibiotics]], [[parenteral nutrition]], and [[pain killer]]s via automated injection employing [[infusion pump]]s (background right). [[Hemodialysis]] via the machine on the left became necessary due to [[kidney]] malfunction and [[multiple organ dysfunction syndrome]]. After three months in the hospital, the patient recovered within a month and has since then fully recovered (as of 2023).]]


Infections leading to sepsis are usually [[pathogenic bacteria|bacterial]] but may be [[mycosis|fungal]], [[Parasitic disease|parasitic]], or [[viral disease|viral]].<ref name= "Mandell2014"/> [[Gram-positive bacteria]] were the primary cause of sepsis before the introduction of antibiotics in the 1950s. After the introduction of antibiotics, [[gram-negative bacteria]] became the predominant cause of sepsis from the 1960s to the 1980s.<ref name="Polat"/> After the 1980s, gram-positive bacteria, most commonly [[staphylococci]], are thought to cause more than 50% of cases of sepsis.<ref name="Martin2012"/><ref name="BlochID"/> Other commonly implicated bacteria include ''[[Streptococcus pyogenes]]'', ''[[Escherichia coli]]'', ''[[Pseudomonas aeruginosa]]'', and ''[[Klebsiella]]'' species.<ref name="Ramachandran2014"/> [[Fungemia|Fungal sepsis]] accounts for approximately 5% of severe sepsis and septic shock cases; the most common cause of fungal sepsis is an infection by ''[[Candida (fungus)|Candida]]'' species of [[yeast]],<ref name="Delalove2014"/> a frequent [[hospital-acquired infection]]. The most common causes for parasitic sepsis are ''[[Plasmodium]]'' (which leads to [[malaria]]), ''[[Schistosoma]]'' and ''[[Echinococcus]]''.
Infections leading to sepsis are usually [[pathogenic bacteria|bacterial]] but may be [[mycosis|fungal]], [[Parasitic disease|parasitic]], or [[viral disease|viral]].<ref name= "Mandell2014"/> [[Gram-positive bacteria]] were the primary cause of sepsis before the introduction of antibiotics in the 1950s. After the introduction of antibiotics, [[gram-negative bacteria]] became the predominant cause of sepsis from the 1960s to the 1980s.<ref name="Polat"/> After the 1980s, gram-positive bacteria, most commonly [[staphylococci]], are thought to cause more than 50% of cases of sepsis.<ref name="Martin2012"/><ref name="BlochID"/> Other commonly implicated bacteria include ''[[Streptococcus pyogenes]]'', ''[[Escherichia coli]]'', ''[[Pseudomonas aeruginosa]]'', and ''[[Klebsiella]]'' species.<ref name="Ramachandran2014"/> [[Fungemia|Fungal sepsis]] accounts for approximately 5% of severe sepsis and septic shock cases; the most common cause of fungal sepsis is an infection by ''[[Candida (fungus)|Candida]]'' species of [[yeast]],<ref name="Delalove2014"/> a frequent [[hospital-acquired infection]]. The most common causes for parasitic sepsis are ''[[Plasmodium]]'' (which leads to [[malaria]]), ''[[Schistosoma]]'' and ''[[Echinococcus]]''.


The most common sites of infection resulting in severe sepsis are the lungs, the abdomen, and the urinary tract.<ref name= "Mandell2014"/> Typically, 50% of all sepsis cases start as an infection in the lungs. In one-third to one-half of cases, the source of infection is unclear.<ref name= "Mandell2014"/>
The most common sites of infection resulting in severe sepsis are the lungs, the abdomen, and the urinary tract.<ref name= "Mandell2014"/> 40–60% of infections causing sepsis originate in the lungs, 15–30% are abdominal infections, and 15–30% are bladder, kidney, skin or soft tissue infections.<ref name="Meyer 2024" /> But the site of infection, as well as the causative infectious pathogen vary depending on geographic location and region.<ref name="Meyer 2024" />


== Pathophysiology ==
== Pathophysiology ==
Sepsis is caused by a combination of factors related to the particular invading pathogen(s) and the status of the immune system of the host.<ref name=Critical2005 /> The early phase of sepsis, characterized by excessive inflammation (sometimes resulting in a [[cytokine storm]]), may be followed by a prolonged period of [[immunosuppression|decreased functioning of the immune system]].<ref name=Shukla2014/><ref name="pmid31611560" /> Either of these phases may prove fatal. On the other hand, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) occurs in people without the presence of infection, for example, in those with [[burn]]s, [[polytrauma]], or the initial state in [[pancreatitis]] and [[chemical pneumonitis]]. However, sepsis also causes a similar response to SIRS.<ref name="1992consensus"/>
Sepsis is caused by a combination of factors related to the particular invading pathogen(s) and the status of the immune system of the host.<ref name=Critical2005 /> The early phase of sepsis, characterized by excessive inflammation (sometimes resulting in a [[cytokine storm]]), may be followed by a prolonged period of [[immunosuppression|decreased functioning of the immune system]].<ref name=Shukla2014/><ref name="pmid31611560" /> Either of these phases may prove fatal. On the other hand, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) occurs in people without the presence of infection, for example, in those with [[burn]]s, [[polytrauma]], or the initial state in [[pancreatitis]] and [[chemical pneumonitis]]. However, sepsis also causes a similar response to SIRS.<ref name="1992consensus"/>


Line 64: Line 64:
There are several microbial factors that may cause the typical septic [[Inflammation|inflammatory cascade]]. An invading pathogen is recognized by its [[pathogen-associated molecular pattern]]s (PAMPs). Examples of PAMPs include lipopolysaccharides and [[flagellin]] in gram-negative bacteria, [[muramyl dipeptide]] in the [[peptidoglycan]] of the gram-positive bacterial cell wall, and [[CpG dinucleotide|CpG bacterial DNA]]. These PAMPs are recognized by the [[pattern recognition receptors]] (PRRs) of the innate immune system, which may be membrane-bound or cytosolic.<ref name=Leentjens2013/> There are four families of PRRs: the [[toll-like receptors]], the [[C-type lectin]] receptors, the [[NOD-like receptor]]s, and the [[RIG-I-like receptor]]s. Invariably, the association of a PAMP and a PRR will cause a series of intracellular signalling cascades. Consequently, transcription factors such as [[nuclear factor-kappa B]] and [[AP-1 transcription factor|activator protein-1]] will up-regulate the expression of pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines.<ref name=Antonopoulou2011/>
There are several microbial factors that may cause the typical septic [[Inflammation|inflammatory cascade]]. An invading pathogen is recognized by its [[pathogen-associated molecular pattern]]s (PAMPs). Examples of PAMPs include lipopolysaccharides and [[flagellin]] in gram-negative bacteria, [[muramyl dipeptide]] in the [[peptidoglycan]] of the gram-positive bacterial cell wall, and [[CpG dinucleotide|CpG bacterial DNA]]. These PAMPs are recognized by the [[pattern recognition receptors]] (PRRs) of the innate immune system, which may be membrane-bound or cytosolic.<ref name=Leentjens2013/> There are four families of PRRs: the [[toll-like receptors]], the [[C-type lectin]] receptors, the [[NOD-like receptor]]s, and the [[RIG-I-like receptor]]s. Invariably, the association of a PAMP and a PRR will cause a series of intracellular signalling cascades. Consequently, transcription factors such as [[nuclear factor-kappa B]] and [[AP-1 transcription factor|activator protein-1]] will up-regulate the expression of pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines.<ref name=Antonopoulou2011/>


Other immunological responses related to microbial infections, such as [[Neutrophil extracellular traps|NETs]], can also play a role or be observed in sepsis. NET formation only occurs via neutrophil cell death, which occurs during microbial infections. Neutrophil extracellular traps, called NETs, eliminate bacteria from the blood flow. These compounds are part of the innate immune system, which is activated initially during infections.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Denning |first1=Naomi-Liza |last2=Aziz |first2=Monowar |last3=Gurien |first3=Steven D. |last4=Wang |first4=Ping |date=2019-10-30 |title=DAMPs and NETs in Sepsis |journal=Frontiers in Immunology |language=English |volume=10 |page=2536 |doi=10.3389/fimmu.2019.02536 |doi-access=free |pmid=31736963 |pmc=6831555 |issn=1664-3224}}</ref>
Other immunological responses related to microbial infections, such as [[Neutrophil extracellular traps|NETs]], can also play a role or be observed in sepsis. NET formation only occurs via neutrophil cell death, which occurs during microbial infections. Neutrophil extracellular traps, called NETs, eliminate bacteria from the blood flow. These compounds are part of the innate immune system, which is activated initially during infections.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Denning |first1=Naomi-Liza |last2=Aziz |first2=Monowar |last3=Gurien |first3=Steven D. |last4=Wang |first4=Ping |date=2019-10-30 |title=DAMPs and NETs in Sepsis |journal=Frontiers in Immunology |language=English |volume=10 |article-number=2536 |doi=10.3389/fimmu.2019.02536 |doi-access=free |pmid=31736963 |pmc=6831555 |issn=1664-3224}}</ref>


=== Host factors ===
=== Host factors ===
Line 93: Line 93:
* ''[[Septic shock]]'' is severe sepsis plus persistently [[hypotension|low blood pressure]], despite the administration of intravenous fluids.<ref name=SSCG2012/>
* ''[[Septic shock]]'' is severe sepsis plus persistently [[hypotension|low blood pressure]], despite the administration of intravenous fluids.<ref name=SSCG2012/>


In 2016, a new consensus was reached to replace screening by [[systemic inflammatory response syndrome]] (SIRS) with the sequential organ failure assessment ([[SOFA score]]) and the abbreviated version ([[qSOFA]]).<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016"/> The three criteria for the qSOFA score include a respiratory rate greater than or equal to 22 breaths per minute, systolic blood pressure 100 mmHg or less, and altered mental status.<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016" /> Sepsis is suspected when 2 of the qSOFA criteria are met.<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016" /> The SOFA score was intended to be used in the intensive care unit (ICU) where it is administered upon admission to the ICU and then repeated every 48 hours, whereas the qSOFA could be used outside the ICU.<ref name="Gauer et al">{{cite journal | vauthors = Gauer RL | title = Early recognition and management of sepsis in adults: the first six hours | journal = American Family Physician | volume = 88 | issue = 1 | pages = 44–53 | date = July 2013 | pmid = 23939605 }}</ref> Some advantages of the qSOFA score are that it can be administered quickly and does not require labs.<ref name="Gauer et al" /> However, the [[American College of Chest Physicians]] (CHEST) raised concerns that qSOFA and SOFA criteria may lead to delayed diagnosis of serious infection, leading to delayed treatment.<ref name=Simpson2016/> Although SIRS criteria can be too sensitive and not specific enough in identifying sepsis, SOFA also has its limitations and is not intended to replace the SIRS definition.<ref name=Vincent2016/> qSOFA has also been found to be poorly sensitive though decently specific for the risk of death with SIRS possibly better for screening. NOTE - Surviving Sepsis Campaign 2021 Guidelines recommend "against using qSOFA compared with SIRS, NEWS, or MEWS as a single screening tool for sepsis or septic shock".<ref name=Fernando2018/>
In 2016, a new consensus was reached to replace screening by [[systemic inflammatory response syndrome]] (SIRS) with the sequential organ failure assessment ([[SOFA score]]) and the abbreviated version ([[qSOFA]]).<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016"/> The three criteria for the qSOFA score include a respiratory rate greater than or equal to 22 breaths per minute, systolic blood pressure 100&nbsp;mmHg or less, and altered mental status.<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016" /> Sepsis is suspected when 2 of the qSOFA criteria are met.<ref name="Sepsis–3_2016" /> The SOFA score was intended to be used in the intensive care unit (ICU) where it is administered upon admission to the ICU and then repeated every 48 hours, whereas the qSOFA could be used outside the ICU.<ref name="Gauer et al">{{cite journal | vauthors = Gauer RL | title = Early recognition and management of sepsis in adults: the first six hours | journal = [[American Family Physician]] | volume = 88 | issue = 1 | pages = 44–53 | date = July 2013 | pmid = 23939605 }}</ref> Some advantages of the qSOFA score are that it can be administered quickly and does not require labs.<ref name="Gauer et al" /> However, the [[American College of Chest Physicians]] (CHEST) raised concerns that qSOFA and SOFA criteria may lead to delayed diagnosis of serious infection, leading to delayed treatment.<ref name=Simpson2016/> Although SIRS criteria can be too sensitive and not specific enough in identifying sepsis, SOFA also has its limitations and is not intended to replace the SIRS definition.<ref name=Vincent2016/> qSOFA has also been found to be poorly sensitive though decently specific for the risk of death with SIRS possibly better for screening. NOTE - Surviving Sepsis Campaign 2021 Guidelines recommend "against using qSOFA compared with SIRS, NEWS, or MEWS as a single screening tool for sepsis or septic shock".<ref name=Fernando2018/>


=== End-organ dysfunction ===
=== End-organ dysfunction ===
Line 134: Line 134:


=== Biomarkers ===
=== Biomarkers ===
Biomarkers can help with diagnosis because they can point to the presence or severity of sepsis, although their exact role in the management of sepsis remains undefined.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Pierrakos C, Vincent JL | title = Sepsis biomarkers: a review | journal = Critical Care | volume = 14 | issue = 1 | pages = R15 | date = 2010 | pmid = 20144219 | pmc = 2875530 | doi = 10.1186/cc8872 | doi-access = free }}</ref> A 2013 [[review]] concluded moderate-quality evidence exists to support the use of the [[procalcitonin]] level as a method to distinguish sepsis from non-infectious causes of SIRS.<ref name="Wacker2013"/> The same review found the [[Sensitivity and specificity|sensitivity]] of the test to be 77% and the specificity to be 79%. The authors suggested that procalcitonin may serve as a helpful diagnostic marker for sepsis, but cautioned that its level alone does not definitively make the diagnosis.<ref name="Wacker2013"/> More current literature recommends utilizing the PCT to direct antibiotic therapy for improved antibiotic stewardship and better patient outcomes.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Valencia L | title = PCT testing in sepsis protocols | journal = Frontiers in Analytical Science|  date = July 2023 | volume = 3 | doi = 10.3389/frans.2023.1229003 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
Biomarkers can help with diagnosis because they can point to the presence or severity of sepsis, although their exact role in the management of sepsis remains undefined.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Pierrakos C, Vincent JL | title = Sepsis biomarkers: a review | journal = Critical Care | volume = 14 | issue = 1 | article-number = R15 | date = 2010 | pmid = 20144219 | pmc = 2875530 | doi = 10.1186/cc8872 | doi-access = free }}</ref> A 2013 [[review]] concluded moderate-quality evidence exists to support the use of the [[procalcitonin]] level as a method to distinguish sepsis from non-infectious causes of SIRS.<ref name="Wacker2013"/> The same review found the [[Sensitivity and specificity|sensitivity]] of the test to be 77% and the specificity to be 79%. The authors suggested that procalcitonin may serve as a helpful diagnostic marker for sepsis, but cautioned that its level alone does not definitively make the diagnosis.<ref name="Wacker2013"/> More current literature recommends utilizing the PCT to direct antibiotic therapy for improved antibiotic stewardship and better patient outcomes.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Valencia L | title = PCT testing in sepsis protocols | journal = Frontiers in Analytical Science|  date = July 2023 | volume = 3 | article-number = 1229003 | doi = 10.3389/frans.2023.1229003 | doi-access = free }}</ref>


A 2012 systematic review found that [[SuPAR|soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor]] (SuPAR) is a nonspecific marker of inflammation and does not accurately diagnose sepsis.<ref name="Backes2012"/> This same review concluded, however, that SuPAR has prognostic value, as higher SuPAR levels are associated with an increased rate of death in those with sepsis.<ref name="Backes2012"/> Serial measurement of lactate levels (approximately every 4 to 6 hours) may guide treatment and is associated with lower mortality in sepsis.<ref name="Gauer et al" />
A 2012 systematic review found that [[SuPAR|soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor]] (SuPAR) is a nonspecific marker of inflammation and does not accurately diagnose sepsis.<ref name="Backes2012"/> This same review concluded, however, that SuPAR has prognostic value, as higher SuPAR levels are associated with an increased rate of death in those with sepsis.<ref name="Backes2012"/> Serial measurement of lactate levels (approximately every 4 to 6 hours) may guide treatment and is associated with lower mortality in sepsis.<ref name="Gauer et al" />
Line 142: Line 142:


=== Neonatal sepsis ===
=== Neonatal sepsis ===
In common clinical usage, [[neonatal sepsis]] refers to a bacterial [[bacteremia|blood stream infection]] in the first month of life, such as [[meningitis]], [[pneumonia]], [[pyelonephritis]], or [[gastroenteritis]],<ref name="Satar2012"/> but neonatal sepsis also may be due to infection with fungi, viruses, or parasites.<ref name="Satar2012"/> Criteria with regard to hemodynamic compromise or respiratory failure are not useful because they present too late for intervention.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Wijekumara |first=Shanaka |date=October 6, 2024 |title=Sepsis and Septic Shock: Definition, Symptoms, and Treatment |url=https://www.surgicaliq.com/sepsis-definition-symptoms-diagnosis-treatment/ |website=SurgicalIQ}}</ref>
In common clinical usage, [[neonatal sepsis]] refers to a bacterial [[bacteremia|blood stream infection]] in the first month of life, such as [[meningitis]], [[pneumonia]], [[pyelonephritis]], or [[gastroenteritis]],<ref name="Satar2012"/> but neonatal sepsis also may be due to infection with fungi, viruses, or parasites.<ref name="Satar2012"/> Criteria with regard to hemodynamic compromise or respiratory failure are not useful because they present too late for intervention.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Wijekumara |first=Shanaka |date=6 October 2024 |title=Sepsis and Septic Shock: Definition, Symptoms, and Treatment |url=https://www.surgicaliq.com/sepsis-definition-symptoms-diagnosis-treatment/ |website=SurgicalIQ}}</ref>


== Management ==
== Treatment ==
[[File:Sepsis treatment.jpg|thumb|Intravenous fluids being given]]
[[File:Sepsis treatment.jpg|thumb|Intravenous fluids being given]]
Early recognition and focused management may improve the outcomes of sepsis. Current professional recommendations include several actions ("bundles") to be followed as soon as possible after diagnosis. Within the first three hours, someone with sepsis should have received antibiotics and intravenous fluids if there is evidence of either low blood pressure or other evidence for inadequate blood supply to organs (as evidenced by a raised level of lactate); blood cultures also should be obtained within this period. After six hours, the blood pressure should be adequate, close monitoring of blood pressure and blood supply to organs should be in place, and the lactate should be measured again if initially it was raised.<ref name=SSCG2012/> A related bundle, the "[[Sepsis Six]]", is in widespread use in the [[United Kingdom]]; this requires the administration of antibiotics within an hour of recognition, blood cultures, lactate, and hemoglobin determination, urine output monitoring, high-flow oxygen, and intravenous fluids.<ref name=Daniels2011/><ref name=SIGN139/>
{{See also|Antiseptic|Asepsis}}
 
Sepsis requires immediate treatment in a hospital as it can quickly worsen. Current professional recommendations include several actions ("bundles") to be followed as soon as possible after diagnosis. Within the first three hours, someone with sepsis should have received antibiotics and intravenous fluids if there is evidence of either low blood pressure or other evidence for inadequate blood supply to organs (as evidenced by a raised level of lactate); blood cultures should also be obtained within this period. After six hours, the blood pressure should be adequate, close monitoring of blood pressure and blood supply to organs should be in place, and the lactate should be measured again if initially it was raised.<ref name=SSCG2012/> A related bundle, the "[[Sepsis Six]]", is in widespread use in the [[United Kingdom]]; this requires the administration of antibiotics within an hour of recognition, blood cultures, lactate, and hemoglobin determination, urine output monitoring, high-flow oxygen, and intravenous fluids.<ref name=Daniels2011/><ref name=SIGN139/>


Apart from the timely administration of fluids and [[antibiotic]]s, the management of sepsis also involves surgical drainage of infected fluid collections and appropriate support for organ dysfunction. This may include [[Kidney dialysis|hemodialysis]] in [[kidney failure]], [[mechanical ventilation]] in [[lung]] dysfunction, transfusion of [[blood plasma|blood products]], and drug and fluid therapy for circulatory failure. Ensuring adequate nutrition—preferably by [[enteral feeding]], but if necessary, by [[parenteral nutrition]]—is important during prolonged illness.<ref name=SSCG2012/> Medication to prevent [[deep vein thrombosis]] and [[gastric ulcers]] also may be used.<ref name=SSCG2012/>
Apart from the timely administration of fluids and [[antibiotic]]s, the management of sepsis also involves surgical drainage of infected fluid collections and appropriate support for organ dysfunction. This may include [[Kidney dialysis|hemodialysis]] in [[kidney failure]], [[mechanical ventilation]] in [[lung]] dysfunction, transfusion of [[blood plasma|blood products]], and drug and fluid therapy for circulatory failure. Ensuring adequate nutrition—preferably by [[enteral feeding]], but if necessary, by [[parenteral nutrition]]—is important during prolonged illness.<ref name=SSCG2012/> Medication to prevent [[deep vein thrombosis]] and [[gastric ulcers]] also may be used.<ref name=SSCG2012/>


=== Antibiotics ===
=== Antibiotics ===
Two sets of blood cultures (aerobic and anaerobic) are recommended without delaying the initiation of antibiotics. Cultures from other sites such as respiratory secretions, urine, wounds, cerebrospinal fluid, and catheter insertion sites are recommended if infections from these sites are suspected.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> In severe sepsis and septic shock, [[broad-spectrum antibiotic]]s (usually two, a [[β-lactam antibiotic]] with broad coverage, or broad-spectrum [[carbapenem]] combined with [[Quinolone antibiotic|fluoroquinolones]], [[macrolide]]s, or [[aminoglycoside]]s) are recommended. The choice of antibiotics is important in determining the survival of the person.<ref name="Marik2014Chest"/><ref name="SSC–G2016"/> Some recommend they be given within one hour of making the diagnosis, stating that for every hour of delay in the administration of antibiotics, there is an associated 6% rise in mortality.<ref name=Soong2012 /><ref name="Marik2014Chest"/> Others did not find a benefit with early administration.<ref name=Sterling2015/>


Two sets of blood cultures (aerobic and anaerobic) are recommended without delaying the initiation of antibiotics. Cultures from other sites such as respiratory secretions, urine, wounds, cerebrospinal fluid, and catheter insertion sites (in situ for more than 48 hours) are recommended if infections from these sites are suspected.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> In severe sepsis and septic shock, [[broad-spectrum antibiotic]]s (usually two, a [[β-lactam antibiotic]] with broad coverage, or broad-spectrum [[carbapenem]] combined with [[Quinolone antibiotic|fluoroquinolones]], [[macrolide]]s, or [[aminoglycoside]]s) are recommended. The choice of antibiotics is important in determining the survival of the person.<ref name="Marik2014Chest"/><ref name="SSC–G2016"/> Some recommend they be given within one hour of making the diagnosis, stating that for every hour of delay in the administration of antibiotics, there is an associated 6% rise in mortality.<ref name=Soong2012 /><ref name="Marik2014Chest"/> Others did not find a benefit with early administration.<ref name=Sterling2015/>
Several factors determine the most appropriate choice for the initial antibiotic regimen. These factors include local patterns of bacterial sensitivity to antibiotics, whether the infection is thought to be a [[Hospital-acquired infection|hospital]] or community-acquired infection, and which organ systems are thought to be infected.<ref name="Marik2014Chest"/><ref name="Gauer et al" /> Antibiotic regimens should be reassessed daily and narrowed if appropriate. Treatment duration is typically 7–10&nbsp;days with the type of antibiotic used directed by the results of cultures. If the culture result is negative, antibiotics should be de-escalated according to the person's clinical response or stopped altogether if an infection is not present to decrease the chances that the person is infected with [[multiple drug resistance]] organisms. In case of people having a high risk of being infected with [[multiple drug resistance|multiple drug resistant]] organisms such as ''[[Pseudomonas aeruginosa]]'', ''[[Acinetobacter baumannii]]'', the addition of an antibiotic specific to the organism is recommended. For [[Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus|methicillin-resistant ''Staphylococcus aureus'']] (MRSA), [[vancomycin]] or [[teicoplanin]] is recommended. For ''[[Legionella]]'' infection, addition of [[macrolide]] or [[fluoroquinolone]] is chosen. If fungal infection is suspected, an [[echinocandin]], such as [[caspofungin]] or [[micafungin]], is chosen for people with severe sepsis, followed by [[triazole]] ([[fluconazole]] and [[itraconazole]]) for less ill people.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended in people who have SIRS without any infectious origin, such as [[acute pancreatitis]] and [[burn]]s unless sepsis is suspected.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>
 
Several factors determine the most appropriate choice for the initial antibiotic regimen. These factors include local patterns of bacterial sensitivity to antibiotics, whether the infection is thought to be a [[Hospital-acquired infection|hospital]] or community-acquired infection, and which organ systems are thought to be infected.<ref name="Marik2014Chest"/><ref name="Gauer et al" /> Antibiotic regimens should be reassessed daily and narrowed if appropriate. Treatment duration is typically 7–10&nbsp;days with the type of antibiotic used directed by the results of cultures. If the culture result is negative, antibiotics should be de-escalated according to the person's clinical response or stopped altogether if an infection is not present to decrease the chances that the person is infected with [[multiple drug resistance]] organisms. In case of people having a high risk of being infected with [[multiple drug resistance|multiple drug resistant]] organisms such as ''[[Pseudomonas aeruginosa]]'', ''[[Acinetobacter baumannii]]'', the addition of an antibiotic specific to the gram-negative organism is recommended. For [[Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus|methicillin-resistant ''Staphylococcus aureus'']] (MRSA), [[vancomycin]] or [[teicoplanin]] is recommended. For ''[[Legionella]]'' infection, addition of [[macrolide]] or [[fluoroquinolone]] is chosen. If fungal infection is suspected, an [[echinocandin]], such as [[caspofungin]] or [[micafungin]], is chosen for people with severe sepsis, followed by [[triazole]] ([[fluconazole]] and [[itraconazole]]) for less ill people.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended in people who have SIRS without any infectious origin, such as [[acute pancreatitis]] and [[burn]]s unless sepsis is suspected.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>


Once-daily dosing of [[aminoglycoside]] is sufficient to achieve peak plasma concentration for a clinical response without kidney toxicity. Meanwhile, for antibiotics with low volume distribution (vancomycin, teicoplanin, colistin), a loading dose is required to achieve an adequate therapeutic level to fight infections. Frequent infusions of beta-lactam antibiotics without exceeding the total daily dose would help to keep the antibiotic level above [[minimum inhibitory concentration]] (MIC), thus providing a better clinical response.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Giving beta-lactam antibiotics continuously may be better than giving them intermittently.<ref name=Roberts2016/> Access to [[therapeutic drug monitoring]] is important to ensure adequate drug therapeutic level while at the same time preventing the drug from reaching a toxic level.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>
Once-daily dosing of [[aminoglycoside]] is sufficient to achieve peak plasma concentration for a clinical response without kidney toxicity. Meanwhile, for antibiotics with low volume distribution (vancomycin, teicoplanin, colistin), a loading dose is required to achieve an adequate therapeutic level to fight infections. Frequent infusions of beta-lactam antibiotics without exceeding the total daily dose would help to keep the antibiotic level above [[minimum inhibitory concentration]] (MIC), thus providing a better clinical response.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Giving beta-lactam antibiotics continuously may be better than giving them intermittently.<ref name=Roberts2016/> Access to [[therapeutic drug monitoring]] is important to ensure adequate drug therapeutic level while at the same time preventing the drug from reaching a toxic level.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>


=== Intravenous fluids ===
=== Intravenous fluids ===
The [[Surviving Sepsis Campaign]] has recommended 30 mL/kg of fluid to be given in adults in the first three hours followed by fluid titration according to blood pressure, urine output, respiratory rate, and oxygen saturation with a target [[mean arterial pressure]] (MAP) of 65 mmHg.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> In children, an initial amount of 20 mL/kg is reasonable in shock.<ref name="de Caen2015"/> In cases of severe sepsis and septic shock where a [[central venous catheter]] is used to measure blood pressures dynamically, fluids should be administered until the [[central venous pressure]] reaches 8–12 mmHg.<ref name="Marik2014"/> Once these goals are met, the central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2), i.e., the oxygen saturation of venous blood as it returns to the heart as measured at the vena cava, is optimized.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> If the ScvO2 is less than 70%, blood may be given to reach a hemoglobin of 10&nbsp;g/dL and then [[inotrope]]s are added until the ScvO2 is optimized.<ref name=Critical2005 /> In those with [[acute respiratory distress syndrome]] (ARDS) and sufficient tissue blood fluid, more fluids should be given carefully.<ref name=SSCG2012/>
The [[Surviving Sepsis Campaign]] has recommended 30&nbsp;mL/kg of fluid to be given in adults in the first three hours followed by fluid titration according to blood pressure, urine output, respiratory rate, and oxygen saturation with a target [[mean arterial pressure]] (MAP) of 65&nbsp;mmHg.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> In children, an initial amount of 20&nbsp;mL/kg is reasonable in shock.<ref name="de Caen2015"/> In cases of severe sepsis and septic shock where a [[central venous catheter]] is used to measure blood pressures dynamically, fluids should be administered until the [[central venous pressure]] reaches 8–12 mmHg.<ref name="Marik2014"/> Once these goals are met, the central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2), i.e., the oxygen saturation of venous blood as it returns to the heart as measured at the vena cava, is optimized.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> If the ScvO2 is less than 70%, blood may be given to reach a hemoglobin of 10&nbsp;g/dL and then [[inotrope]]s are added until the ScvO2 is optimized.<ref name=Critical2005 /> In those with [[acute respiratory distress syndrome]] (ARDS) and sufficient tissue blood fluid, more fluids should be given carefully.<ref name=SSCG2012/>


[[Crystalloid solution]] is recommended as the fluid of choice for resuscitation.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> [[Albumin]] can be used if a large amount of crystalloid is required for resuscitation.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Crystalloid solutions shows little difference with [[hydroxyethyl starch]] in terms of risk of death.<ref name=Lew2018/> Starches also carry an increased risk of [[acute kidney injury]],<ref name=Lew2018 /><ref name= Zarychanski2013/> and need for blood transfusion.<ref name=Haase2013/><ref name=Serpa2014/> Various colloid solutions (such as modified gelatin) carry no advantage over crystalloid.<ref name=Lew2018 /> Albumin also appears to be of no benefit over crystalloids.<ref name=Patel2014/>
[[Crystalloid solution]] is recommended as the fluid of choice for resuscitation.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> "Balanced" crystalloid solutions such as [[lactated ringers]] (which have levels of sodium, potassium and chloride closer to a person's extracellular levels) are associated with a lower mortality as compared to normal saline solutions in the treatment of sepsis.<ref name="Meyer 2024" /> [[Albumin]] can be used if a large amount of crystalloid is required for resuscitation.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Crystalloid solutions shows little difference with [[hydroxyethyl starch]] in terms of risk of death.<ref name=Lew2018/> Starches also carry an increased risk of [[acute kidney injury]],<ref name=Lew2018 /><ref name= Zarychanski2013/> and need for blood transfusion.<ref name=Haase2013/><ref name=Serpa2014/> Various colloid solutions (such as modified gelatin) carry no advantage over crystalloid.<ref name=Lew2018 /> Albumin also appears to be of no benefit over crystalloids.<ref name=Patel2014/>


=== Blood products ===
=== Blood products ===
The Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommended [[packed red blood cells]] transfusion for [[hemoglobin]] levels below 70 g/L if there is no [[myocardial ischemia]], [[hypoxemia]], or acute bleeding.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> In a 2014 trial, blood transfusions to keep target hemoglobin above 70 or 90 g/L did not make any difference to survival rates; meanwhile, those with a lower threshold of transfusion received fewer transfusions in total.<ref name=Holst2014/> [[Erythropoietin]] is not recommended in the treatment of anemia with septic shock because it may precipitate blood clotting events. [[Fresh frozen plasma]] transfusion usually does not correct the underlying clotting abnormalities before a planned surgical procedure. However, platelet transfusion is suggested for platelet counts below (10 billion/L) without any risk of bleeding, or (20 billion/L) with a high risk of bleeding, or (50 billion/L) with active bleeding, before planned surgery or an invasive procedure.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> IV immunoglobulin is not recommended because its beneficial effects are uncertain.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Monoclonal and polyclonal preparations of [[intravenous immunoglobulin|intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG)]] do not lower the rate of death in newborns and adults with sepsis.<ref name="Alejandria2013"/> Evidence for the use of [[immunoglobulin M|IgM]]-enriched polyclonal preparations of IVIG is inconsistent.<ref name="Alejandria2013"/> On the other hand, the use of [[antithrombin#Medical uses|antithrombin]] to treat [[disseminated intravascular coagulation]] is also not useful. Meanwhile, the blood purification technique (such as [[hemoperfusion]], plasma filtration, and coupled plasma filtration adsorption) to remove inflammatory mediators and bacterial toxins from the blood also does not demonstrate any survival benefit for septic shock.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>
The Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommended [[packed red blood cells]] transfusion for [[hemoglobin]] levels below 70&nbsp;g/L if there is no [[myocardial ischemia]], [[hypoxemia]], or acute bleeding.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> In a 2014 trial, blood transfusions to keep target hemoglobin above 70 or 90&nbsp;g/L did not make any difference to survival rates; meanwhile, those with a lower threshold of transfusion received fewer transfusions in total.<ref name=Holst2014/> [[Erythropoietin]] is not recommended in the treatment of anemia with septic shock because it may precipitate blood clotting events. [[Fresh frozen plasma]] transfusion usually does not correct the underlying clotting abnormalities before a planned surgical procedure. However, platelet transfusion is suggested for platelet counts below (10 billion/L) without any risk of bleeding, or (20 billion/L) with a high risk of bleeding, or (50 billion/L) with active bleeding, before planned surgery or an invasive procedure.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> IV immunoglobulin is not recommended because its beneficial effects are uncertain.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Monoclonal and polyclonal preparations of [[intravenous immunoglobulin|intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG)]] do not lower the rate of death in newborns and adults with sepsis.<ref name="Alejandria2013"/> Evidence for the use of [[immunoglobulin M|IgM]]-enriched polyclonal preparations of IVIG is inconsistent.<ref name="Alejandria2013"/> On the other hand, the use of [[antithrombin#Medical uses|antithrombin]] to treat [[disseminated intravascular coagulation]] is also not useful. Meanwhile, the blood purification technique (such as [[hemoperfusion]], plasma filtration, and coupled plasma filtration adsorption) to remove inflammatory mediators and bacterial toxins from the blood also does not demonstrate any survival benefit for septic shock.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>


=== Vasopressors ===
=== Vasopressors ===
If the person has been sufficiently fluid resuscitated but the [[mean arterial pressure]] is not greater than 65&nbsp;mmHg, [[vasopressor]]s are recommended.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> [[Norepinephrine (medication)|Norepinephrine]] (noradrenaline) is recommended as the initial choice.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Delaying initiation of vasopressor therapy during septic shock is associated with increased mortality.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Bai X, Yu W, Ji W, Lin Z, Tan S, Duan K, Dong Y, Xu L, Li N | display-authors = 6 | title = Early versus delayed administration of norepinephrine in patients with septic shock | journal = Critical Care | volume = 18 | issue = 5 | pages = 532 | date = October 2014 | pmid = 25277635 | pmc = 4194405 | doi = 10.1186/s13054-014-0532-y | doi-access = free }}</ref>
If the person has been sufficiently fluid resuscitated but the [[mean arterial pressure]] is not greater than 65&nbsp;mmHg, [[vasopressor]]s are recommended.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> [[Norepinephrine (medication)|Norepinephrine]] (noradrenaline) is recommended as the initial choice.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Delaying initiation of vasopressor therapy during septic shock is associated with increased mortality.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Bai X, Yu W, Ji W, Lin Z, Tan S, Duan K, Dong Y, Xu L, Li N | display-authors = 6 | title = Early versus delayed administration of norepinephrine in patients with septic shock | journal = Critical Care | volume = 18 | issue = 5 | article-number = 532 | date = October 2014 | pmid = 25277635 | pmc = 4194405 | doi = 10.1186/s13054-014-0532-y | doi-access = free }}</ref>


Norepinephrine is often used as a first-line treatment for hypotensive septic shock because evidence shows that there is a relative deficiency of vasopressin when shock continues for 24 to 48 hours.<ref name=Avni2015/> Norepinephrine raises blood pressure through a vasoconstriction effect, with little effect on [[stroke volume]] and heart rate.<ref name="SSC–G2016"/> In some people, the required dose of vasopressor needed to increase the mean arterial pressure can become exceedingly high, and it becomes toxic.<ref name=Hamzaoui2017/> To reduce the required dose of vasopressor, epinephrine may be added.<ref name=Hamzaoui2017/> Epinephrine is not often used as a first-line treatment for hypotensive shock because it reduces blood flow to the abdominal organs and increases lactate levels.<ref name= Avni2015/> Vasopressin can be used in septic shock because studies have shown that there is a relative deficiency of vasopressin when shock continues for 24 to 48 hours. However, vasopressin reduces blood flow to the heart, fingers/toes, and abdominal organs, resulting in a lack of oxygen supply to these tissues.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> [[Dopamine]] is typically not recommended. Although dopamine is useful for increasing the stroke volume of the heart, it causes more [[Heart arrhythmia|abnormal heart rhythms]] than norepinephrine and also has an immunosuppressive effect. Dopamine is not proven to have protective properties on the kidneys.<ref name="SSC–G2016"/> [[Dobutamine]] can also be used in hypotensive septic shock to increase cardiac output and correct blood flow to the tissues.<ref name=Dubin2017/> Dobutamine is not used as often as epinephrine due to its associated side effects, which include reducing blood flow to the gut.<ref name=Dubin2017/> Additionally, dobutamine increases the cardiac output by abnormally increasing the heart rate.<ref name=Dubin2017/>
Norepinephrine is often used as a first-line treatment for hypotensive septic shock because evidence shows that there is a relative deficiency of vasopressin when shock continues for 24 to 48 hours.<ref name=Avni2015/> Norepinephrine raises blood pressure through a vasoconstriction effect, with little effect on [[stroke volume]] and heart rate.<ref name="SSC–G2016"/> In some people, the required dose of vasopressor needed to increase the mean arterial pressure can become exceedingly high, and it becomes toxic.<ref name=Hamzaoui2017/> To reduce the required dose of vasopressor, epinephrine may be added.<ref name=Hamzaoui2017/> Epinephrine is not often used as a first-line treatment for hypotensive shock because it reduces blood flow to the abdominal organs and increases lactate levels.<ref name= Avni2015/> Vasopressin can be used in septic shock because studies have shown that there is a relative deficiency of vasopressin when shock continues for 24 to 48 hours. However, vasopressin reduces blood flow to the heart, fingers/toes, and abdominal organs, resulting in a lack of oxygen supply to these tissues.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> [[Dopamine]] is typically not recommended. Although dopamine is useful for increasing the stroke volume of the heart, it causes more [[Heart arrhythmia|abnormal heart rhythms]] than norepinephrine and also has an immunosuppressive effect. Dopamine is not proven to have protective properties on the kidneys.<ref name="SSC–G2016"/> [[Dobutamine]] can also be used in hypotensive septic shock to increase cardiac output and correct blood flow to the tissues.<ref name=Dubin2017/> Dobutamine is not used as often as epinephrine due to its associated side effects, which include reducing blood flow to the gut.<ref name=Dubin2017/> Additionally, dobutamine increases the cardiac output by abnormally increasing the heart rate.<ref name=Dubin2017/>


=== Steroids ===
=== Steroids ===
The use of [[steroids]] in sepsis is controversial.<ref name=Patel2012/> Studies do not give a clear picture as to whether and when [[glucocorticoid]]s should be used.<ref name=Volbeda2015/> The 2016 Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommends low-dose [[hydrocortisone]] only if both intravenous fluids and vasopressors are not able to adequately treat septic shock.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> The 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommends IV corticosteroids for adults with septic shock who have an ongoing requirement for vasopressor therapy. A 2019 Cochrane review found low-quality evidence of benefit,<ref name=Ann2019 /> as did two 2019 reviews.<ref name="Fang2018"/><ref name=Ni2019/>
The use of [[steroids]] in sepsis is controversial.<ref name=Patel2012/> Studies do not give a clear picture as to whether and when [[glucocorticoid]]s should be used.<ref name=Volbeda2015/> The 2016 Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommends low-dose [[hydrocortisone]] only if both intravenous fluids and vasopressors are not able to adequately treat septic shock.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> The 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommends IV corticosteroids for adults with septic shock who have an ongoing requirement for vasopressor therapy. A 2019 Cochrane (updated in 2025) review found moderate certainty evidence of benefit,<ref name=":1" /> as did two 2019 reviews.<ref name="Fang2018"/><ref name=Ni2019/>


During critical illness, a state of [[adrenal insufficiency]] and tissue resistance to [[corticosteroids]] may occur. This has been termed [[critical illness–related corticosteroid insufficiency]].<ref name="pmid18496365"/> Treatment with corticosteroids might be most beneficial in those with [[septic shock]] and early severe ARDS, whereas its role in others such as those with [[pancreatitis]] or severe [[pneumonia]] is unclear.<ref name="pmid18496365" /> However, the exact way of determining corticosteroid insufficiency remains problematic. It should be suspected in those poorly responding to resuscitation with fluids and vasopressors. Neither [[Cort-stim test|ACTH stimulation testing]]<ref name="pmid18496365" /> nor random [[cortisol]] levels are recommended to confirm the diagnosis.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> The method of stopping glucocorticoid drugs is variable, and it is unclear whether they should be slowly decreased or simply abruptly stopped. However, the 2016 Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommended tapering steroids when vasopressors are no longer needed.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>
During critical illness, a state of [[adrenal insufficiency]] and tissue resistance to [[corticosteroids]] may occur. This has been termed [[critical illness–related corticosteroid insufficiency]].<ref name="pmid18496365"/> Treatment with corticosteroids might be most beneficial in those with [[septic shock]] and early severe ARDS, whereas its role in others such as those with [[pancreatitis]] or severe [[pneumonia]] is unclear.<ref name="pmid18496365" /> However, the exact way of determining corticosteroid insufficiency remains problematic. It should be suspected in those poorly responding to resuscitation with fluids and vasopressors. Neither [[Cort-stim test|ACTH stimulation testing]]<ref name="pmid18496365" /> nor random [[cortisol]] levels are recommended to confirm the diagnosis.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> The method of stopping glucocorticoid drugs is variable, and it is unclear whether they should be slowly decreased or simply abruptly stopped. However, the 2016 Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommended tapering steroids when vasopressors are no longer needed.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>


=== Anesthesia ===
=== Anesthesia ===
A target [[tidal volume]] of 6 mL/kg of predicted body weight (PBW) and a [[plateau pressure]] less than 30&nbsp;cm H<sub>2</sub>O is recommended for those who require [[mechanical ventilation|ventilation]] due to sepsis-induced severe ARDS. High [[positive end expiratory pressure]] (PEEP) is recommended for moderate to severe ARDS in sepsis as it opens more lung units for oxygen exchange. Predicted body weight is calculated based on sex and height, and tools for this are available.<ref name="Ardsnet"/> Recruitment maneuvers may be necessary for severe ARDS by briefly raising the transpulmonary pressure. It is recommended that the head of the bed be raised if possible to improve ventilation. However, [[beta2-adrenergic agonist|β2 adrenergic receptor agonists]] are not recommended to treat ARDS because they may reduce survival rates and precipitate [[Heart arrhythmia|abnormal heart rhythms]]. A [[spontaneous breathing trial]] using [[continuous positive airway pressure]] (CPAP), T piece, or inspiratory pressure augmentation can help reduce the duration of ventilation. Minimizing intermittent or continuous sedation helps reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation.<ref name="SSC–G2016"/>
A target [[tidal volume]] of 6&nbsp;mL/kg of predicted body weight (PBW) and a [[plateau pressure]] less than 30&nbsp;cm H<sub>2</sub>O is recommended for those who require [[mechanical ventilation|ventilation]] due to sepsis-induced severe ARDS. High [[positive end expiratory pressure]] (PEEP) is recommended for moderate to severe ARDS in sepsis as it opens more lung units for oxygen exchange. Predicted body weight is calculated based on sex and height, and tools for this are available.<ref name="Ardsnet"/> Recruitment maneuvers may be necessary for severe ARDS by briefly raising the transpulmonary pressure. It is recommended that the head of the bed be raised if possible to improve ventilation. However, [[beta2-adrenergic agonist|β2 adrenergic receptor agonists]] are not recommended to treat ARDS because they may reduce survival rates and precipitate [[Heart arrhythmia|abnormal heart rhythms]]. A [[spontaneous breathing trial]] using [[continuous positive airway pressure]] (CPAP), T piece, or inspiratory pressure augmentation can help reduce the duration of ventilation. Minimizing intermittent or continuous sedation helps reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation.<ref name="SSC–G2016"/>


General anesthesia is recommended for people with sepsis who require surgical procedures to remove the infectious source. Usually, inhalational and intravenous anesthetics are used. Requirements for anesthetics may be reduced in sepsis. [[Inhalational anaesthetic|Inhalational anesthetics]] can reduce the level of proinflammatory cytokines, altering leukocyte adhesion and proliferation, inducing [[apoptosis]] (cell death) of the lymphocytes, possibly with a toxic effect on [[mitochondria]]l function.<ref name="Yuki"/> Although [[etomidate]] has a minimal effect on the cardiovascular system, it is often not recommended as a medication to help with [[intubation]] in this situation due to concerns it may lead to [[adrenal insufficiency|poor adrenal function]] and an increased risk of death.<ref name=Cherfan2012/><ref name=Chan2012/> The small amount of evidence there is, however, has not found a change in the risk of death with etomidate.<ref name=Gu2015/>
General anesthesia is recommended for people with sepsis who require surgical procedures to remove the infectious source. Usually, inhalational and intravenous anesthetics are used. Requirements for anesthetics may be reduced in sepsis. [[Inhalational anaesthetic|Inhalational anesthetics]] can reduce the level of proinflammatory cytokines, altering leukocyte adhesion and proliferation, inducing [[apoptosis]] (cell death) of the lymphocytes, possibly with a toxic effect on [[mitochondria]]l function.<ref name="Yuki"/> Although [[etomidate]] has a minimal effect on the cardiovascular system, it is often not recommended as a medication to help with [[intubation]] in this situation due to concerns it may lead to [[adrenal insufficiency|poor adrenal function]] and an increased risk of death.<ref name=Cherfan2012/><ref name=Chan2012/> The small amount of evidence there is, however, has not found a change in the risk of death with etomidate.<ref name=Gu2015/>
Line 184: Line 185:


=== Source control ===
=== Source control ===
Source control refers to physical interventions to control a [[focus of infection]] and reduce conditions favorable to microorganism growth or host defense impairment, such as [[Incision and drainage|drainage of pus]] from an [[abscess]]. It is one of the oldest procedures for the control of infections, giving rise to the Latin phrase ''[[Ubi pus, ibi evacua]]'', and remains important despite the emergence of more modern treatments.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Lagunes L, Encina B, Ramirez-Estrada S | title = Current understanding in source control management in septic shock patients: a review | journal = Annals of Translational Medicine | volume = 4 | issue = 17 | pages = 330 | date = September 2016 | pmid = 27713888 | pmc = 5050189 | doi = 10.21037/atm.2016.09.02 | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite book | vauthors = De Waele JJ | chapter = Source Control in the ICU|date=2009| title = Yearbook of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine|pages=93–101| veditors = Vincent JL, Malbrain MM, De Laet IE |publisher=Springer Berlin Heidelberg|language=en|doi=10.1007/978-3-540-92276-6_9|isbn=978-3-540-92275-9}}</ref>
Source control refers to physical interventions to control a [[focus of infection]] and reduce conditions favorable to microorganism growth or host defense impairment, such as [[Incision and drainage|drainage of pus]] from an [[abscess]]. It is one of the oldest procedures for the control of infections, giving rise to the Latin phrase ''[[Ubi pus, ibi evacua]]'', and remains important despite the emergence of more modern treatments.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Lagunes L, Encina B, Ramirez-Estrada S | title = Current understanding in source control management in septic shock patients: a review | journal = Annals of Translational Medicine | volume = 4 | issue = 17 | page = 330 | date = September 2016 | pmid = 27713888 | pmc = 5050189 | doi = 10.21037/atm.2016.09.02 | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite book | vauthors = De Waele JJ | chapter = Source Control in the ICU|date=2009| title = Yearbook of Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine|pages=93–101| veditors = Vincent JL, Malbrain MM, De Laet IE |publisher=Springer Berlin Heidelberg|language=en|doi=10.1007/978-3-540-92276-6_9|isbn=978-3-540-92275-9}}</ref>


=== Early goal-directed therapy ===
=== Early goal-directed therapy ===
[[Early goal directed therapy]] (EGDT) is an approach to the management of severe sepsis during the initial 6&nbsp;hours after diagnosis.<ref name=Campaign2008 /> It is a step-wise approach, with the physiologic goal of optimizing cardiac preload, afterload, and contractility.<ref name="EGDT"/> It includes giving early antibiotics.<ref name="EGDT"/> EGDT also involves monitoring of hemodynamic parameters and specific interventions to achieve key resuscitation targets which include maintaining a central venous pressure between 8–12 mmHg, a mean arterial pressure of between 65 and 90 mmHg, a central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO<sub>2</sub>) greater than 70% and a urine output of greater than 0.5 mL/kg/hour. The goal is to optimize oxygen delivery to tissues and achieve a balance between systemic oxygen delivery and demand.<ref name="EGDT"/> An appropriate decrease in serum [[Lactic acid|lactate]] may be equivalent to ScvO<sub>2</sub> and easier to obtain.<ref name=Fuller2012/>
[[Early goal directed therapy]] (EGDT) is an approach to the management of severe sepsis during the initial 6&nbsp;hours after diagnosis.<ref name=Campaign2008 /> It is a step-wise approach, with the physiologic goal of optimizing cardiac preload, afterload, and contractility.<ref name="EGDT"/> It includes giving early antibiotics.<ref name="EGDT"/> EGDT also involves monitoring of hemodynamic parameters and specific interventions to achieve key resuscitation targets which include maintaining a central venous pressure between 8–12 mmHg, a mean arterial pressure of between 65 and 90&nbsp;mmHg, a central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO<sub>2</sub>) greater than 70% and a urine output of greater than 0.5&nbsp;mL/kg/hour. The goal is to optimize oxygen delivery to tissues and achieve a balance between systemic oxygen delivery and demand.<ref name="EGDT"/> An appropriate decrease in serum [[Lactic acid|lactate]] may be equivalent to ScvO<sub>2</sub> and easier to obtain.<ref name=Fuller2012/>


In the original trial, early goal-directed therapy was found to reduce mortality from 46.5% to 30.5% in those with sepsis,<ref name="EGDT"/> and the Surviving Sepsis Campaign has been recommending its use.<ref name=SSCG2012/> However, three more recent large randomized control trials (ProCESS, ARISE, and ProMISe), did not demonstrate a 90-day mortality benefit of early goal-directed therapy when compared to standard therapy in severe sepsis.<ref name=Dell2015/> It is likely that some parts of EGDT are more important than others.<ref name=Dell2015/> Following these trials, the use of EGDT is still considered reasonable.<ref name=Rusconi2015/>
In the original trial, early goal-directed therapy was found to reduce mortality from 46.5% to 30.5% in those with sepsis,<ref name="EGDT"/> and the Surviving Sepsis Campaign has been recommending its use.<ref name=SSCG2012/> However, three more recent large randomized control trials (ProCESS, ARISE, and ProMISe), did not demonstrate a 90-day mortality benefit of early goal-directed therapy when compared to standard therapy in severe sepsis.<ref name=Dell2015/> It is likely that some parts of EGDT are more important than others.<ref name=Dell2015/> Following these trials, the use of EGDT is still considered reasonable.<ref name=Rusconi2015/>
Line 203: Line 204:
In those with [[hyperglycemia|high blood sugar]] levels, [[insulin]] to bring it down to 7.8–10&nbsp;mmol/L (140–180&nbsp;mg/dL) is recommended, with lower levels potentially worsening outcomes.<ref name=Hirasawa2009/> Glucose levels taken from capillary blood should be interpreted with care because such measurements may not be accurate. If a person has an arterial catheter, arterial blood is recommended for blood glucose testing.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>
In those with [[hyperglycemia|high blood sugar]] levels, [[insulin]] to bring it down to 7.8–10&nbsp;mmol/L (140–180&nbsp;mg/dL) is recommended, with lower levels potentially worsening outcomes.<ref name=Hirasawa2009/> Glucose levels taken from capillary blood should be interpreted with care because such measurements may not be accurate. If a person has an arterial catheter, arterial blood is recommended for blood glucose testing.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>


Intermittent or continuous [[renal replacement therapy]] may be used if indicated. However, [[sodium bicarbonate]] is not recommended for a person with lactic acidosis secondary to hypoperfusion. [[Low-molecular-weight heparin]] (LMWH), [[unfractionated heparin]] (UFH), and mechanical prophylaxis with [[intermittent pneumatic compression]] devices are recommended for any person with sepsis at moderate to high risk of [[venous thromboembolism]].<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Stress ulcer prevention with [[proton-pump inhibitor]] (PPI) and [[H2 antagonist]] are useful in a person with risk factors of developing [[upper gastrointestinal bleeding]] (UGIB) such as on mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours, coagulation disorders, liver disease, and renal replacement therapy.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Achieving partial or full enteral feeding (delivery of nutrients through a [[feeding tube]]) is chosen as the best approach to provide nutrition for a person who is contraindicated for oral intake or unable to tolerate orally in the first seven days of sepsis when compared to [[parenteral nutrition|intravenous nutrition]]. However, [[omega-3 fatty acid]]s are not recommended as immune supplements for a person with sepsis or septic shock. The usage of [[prokinetic agent]]s such as [[metoclopramide]], [[domperidone]], and [[erythromycin]] is recommended for those who are septic and unable to tolerate enteral feeding. However, these agents may precipitate prolongation of the [[QT interval]] and consequently provoke a [[ventricular arrhythmia]] such as [[torsades de pointes]]. The usage of prokinetic agents should be reassessed daily and stopped if no longer indicated.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>
Intermittent or continuous [[renal replacement therapy]] may be used if indicated. However, [[sodium bicarbonate]] is not recommended for a person with lactic acidosis secondary to hypoperfusion. [[Low-molecular-weight heparin]] (LMWH), [[unfractionated heparin]] (UFH), and mechanical prophylaxis with [[intermittent pneumatic compression]] devices are recommended for any person with sepsis at moderate to high risk of [[venous thromboembolism]].<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Stress ulcer prevention with [[proton-pump inhibitor]] (PPI) and [[H2 antagonist|H<sub>2</sub> antagonist]] are useful in a person with risk factors of developing [[upper gastrointestinal bleeding]] (UGIB) such as on mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours, coagulation disorders, liver disease, and renal replacement therapy.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/> Achieving partial or full enteral feeding (delivery of nutrients through a [[feeding tube]]) is chosen as the best approach to provide nutrition for a person who is contraindicated for oral intake or unable to tolerate orally in the first seven days of sepsis when compared to [[parenteral nutrition|intravenous nutrition]]. However, [[omega-3 fatty acid]]s are not recommended as immune supplements for a person with sepsis or septic shock. The usage of [[prokinetic agent]]s such as [[metoclopramide]], [[domperidone]], and [[erythromycin]] is recommended for those who are septic and unable to tolerate enteral feeding. However, these agents may precipitate prolongation of the [[QT interval]] and consequently provoke a [[ventricular arrhythmia]] such as [[torsades de pointes]]. The usage of prokinetic agents should be reassessed daily and stopped if no longer indicated.<ref name= "SSC–G2016"/>


People in sepsis may have micronutrient deficiencies, including low levels of vitamin C.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Belsky JB, Wira CR, Jacob V, Sather JE, Lee PJ | title = A review of micronutrients in sepsis: the role of thiamine, L-carnitine, vitamin C, selenium and vitamin D | journal = Nutrition Research Reviews | volume = 31 | issue = 2 | pages = 281–90 | date = December 2018 | pmid = 29984680 | doi = 10.1017/S0954422418000124 | s2cid = 51599526 }}</ref> Reviews mention that an intake of 3.0 g/day, which requires intravenous administration, may be needed to maintain normal plasma concentrations in people with sepsis or severe burn injury.<ref name=Liang2023>{{cite journal |vauthors=Liang B, Su J, Shao H, Chen H, Xie B |title=The outcome of IV vitamin C therapy in patients with sepsis or septic shock: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |journal=Crit Care |volume=27 |issue=1 |pages=109 |date=March 2023 |pmid=36915173 |pmc=10012592 |doi=10.1186/s13054-023-04392-y |url= | doi-access = free | title-link = doi }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Berger MM, Oudemans-van Straaten HM |title=Vitamin C supplementation in the critically ill patient |journal=Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care |volume=18 |issue=2 |pages=193–201 |date=March 2015 |pmid=25635594 |doi=10.1097/MCO.0000000000000148 |s2cid=37895257 |url=}}</ref>
People in sepsis may have micronutrient deficiencies, including low levels of vitamin&nbsp;C.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Belsky JB, Wira CR, Jacob V, Sather JE, Lee PJ | title = A review of micronutrients in sepsis: the role of thiamine, L-carnitine, vitamin C, selenium and vitamin D | journal = Nutrition Research Reviews | volume = 31 | issue = 2 | pages = 281–90 | date = December 2018 | pmid = 29984680 | doi = 10.1017/S0954422418000124 | s2cid = 51599526 }}</ref> Reviews mention that an intake of 3.0&nbsp;g/day, which requires intravenous administration, may be needed to maintain normal plasma concentrations in people with sepsis or severe burn injury.<ref name=Liang2023>{{cite journal |vauthors=Liang B, Su J, Shao H, Chen H, Xie B |title=The outcome of IV vitamin C therapy in patients with sepsis or septic shock: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |journal=Crit Care |volume=27 |issue=1 |article-number=109 |date=March 2023 |pmid=36915173 |pmc=10012592 |doi=10.1186/s13054-023-04392-y |url= | doi-access = free | title-link = doi }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |vauthors=Berger MM, Oudemans-van Straaten HM |title=Vitamin C supplementation in the critically ill patient |journal=Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care |volume=18 |issue=2 |pages=193–201 |date=March 2015 |pmid=25635594 |doi=10.1097/MCO.0000000000000148 |s2cid=37895257 |url=}}</ref>


== Prognosis ==
== Prognosis ==
Sepsis proves fatal for approximately 24.4% of people, and septic shock proves fatal for 34.7% of people within 30 days (32.2% and 38.5% after 90 days).<ref name="pmid32430052"/>
Sepsis proves fatal for approximately 24.4% of people, and septic shock proves fatal for 34.7% of people within 30 days (with fatality rates for sepsis and septic shock being 32.2% and 38.5% after 90 days, respectively).<ref name="pmid32430052"/>
Lactate is a useful method of determining prognosis, with those who have a level greater than 4&nbsp;mmol/L having a mortality of 40% and those with a level of less than 2&nbsp;mmol/L having a mortality of less than 15%.<ref name=Soong2012 />
Lactate is a useful method of determining prognosis, with those who have a level greater than 4&nbsp;mmol/L having a mortality of 40% and those with a level of less than 2&nbsp;mmol/L having a mortality of less than 15%.<ref name=Soong2012 />


There are several prognostic stratification systems, such as [[APACHE II]] and Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis. APACHE II factors in the person's age, underlying condition, and various physiologic variables to yield estimates of the risk of dying of severe sepsis. Of the individual covariates, the severity of the underlying disease most strongly influences the risk of death. Septic shock is also a strong predictor of short- and long-term mortality. Case-fatality rates are similar for culture-positive and culture-negative severe sepsis. The Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis (MEDS) score is simpler and useful in the emergency department environment.<ref name=Carpenter2009/>
There are several prognostic stratification systems, such as [[APACHE II]] and Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis. APACHE II factors in the person's age, underlying condition, and various physiologic variables to yield estimates of the risk of dying of severe sepsis. Of the individual covariates, the severity of the underlying disease most strongly influences the risk of death. Septic shock is also a strong predictor of short- and long-term mortality. Case-fatality rates are similar for culture-positive and culture-negative severe sepsis. The Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis (MEDS) score is simpler and useful in the emergency department environment.<ref name=Carpenter2009/>


Some people may experience severe long-term cognitive decline following an episode of severe sepsis, but the absence of baseline neuropsychological data in most people with sepsis makes the incidence of this difficult to quantify or study.<ref name=Jackson2009/>
Some people may experience severe long-term cognitive decline following an episode of severe sepsis, but the absence of baseline neuropsychological data in most people with sepsis makes the incidence of this difficult to quantify or study.<ref name=Jackson2009/> Other complications in those who survive sepsis include functional decline, being unable to return to work, or in pediatrics being unable to regain baseline health status.<ref name="Meyer 2024" /> Immune dysfunction and hyperinflammation may persist long after sepsis has resolved.<ref name="Meyer 2024" />
 
The global mortality rate from sepsis declined from 50% in 1990 to 35% in 2017. However, the incidence and mortality of sepsis is difficult to quantify due to changing definitions of sepsis and increased recognition of the complication over time.<ref name="Meyer 2024" /><ref name="Rudd 2020">{{cite journal |last1=Rudd |first1=Kristina E. |last2=Johnson |first2=Sarah Charlotte |last3=Agesa |first3=Kareha M. |last4=Shackelford |first4=Katya Anne |last5=Tsoi |first5=Derrick |last6=Kievlan |first6=Daniel Rhodes |last7=Colombara |first7=Danny V. |last8=Ikuta |first8=Kevin S. |last9=Kissoon |first9=Niranjan |last10=Finfer |first10=Simon |last11=Fleischmann-Struzek |first11=Carolin |last12=Machado |first12=Flavia R. |last13=Reinhart |first13=Konrad K. |last14=Rowan |first14=Kathryn |last15=Seymour |first15=Christopher W. |last16=Watson |first16=R Scott |last17=West |first17=T Eoin |last18=Marinho |first18=Fatima |last19=Hay |first19=Simon I. |last20=Lozano |first20=Rafael |last21=Lopez |first21=Alan D. |last22=Angus |first22=Derek C. |last23=Murray |first23=Christopher J L. |last24=Naghavi |first24=Mohsen |title=Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990–2017: analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study |journal=The Lancet |date=January 2020 |volume=395 |issue=10219 |pages=200–211 |doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32989-7 |pmid=31954465 |pmc=6970225 }}</ref>


== Epidemiology ==
== Epidemiology ==
Line 227: Line 230:
[[File:'ware Hitler's Greatest Ally Art.IWMPST14196.jpg|thumb|upright|Personification of ''septicemia'', carrying a spray can marked "[[Poison]]"]]
[[File:'ware Hitler's Greatest Ally Art.IWMPST14196.jpg|thumb|upright|Personification of ''septicemia'', carrying a spray can marked "[[Poison]]"]]


The term "σήψις" (sepsis) was introduced by Hippocrates in the fourth century BC, and it meant the process of [[decomposition|decay or decomposition]] of organic matter.<ref name=Geroulanos2006/><ref name="CavaillonAdrie2008"/><ref name="pmid18171697"/> In the eleventh century, [[Avicenna]] used the term "blood rot" for diseases linked to severe [[Pus|purulent]] process. Though severe systemic toxicity had already been observed, it was only in the 19th century that the specific term&nbsp;– sepsis&nbsp;– was used for this condition.
The term "σήψις" (sepsis) was introduced by Hippocrates in the fourth century BC, and it meant the process of [[putrefaction|decay or decomposition]] of organic matter.<ref name=Geroulanos2006/><ref name="CavaillonAdrie2008"/><ref name="pmid18171697"/> In the eleventh century, [[Avicenna]] used the term "blood rot" for diseases linked to severe [[Pus|purulent]] process. Though severe systemic toxicity had already been observed, it was only in the 19th century that the specific term&nbsp;– sepsis&nbsp;– was used for this condition.


The terms "septicemia", also spelled "septicaemia", and "blood poisoning" referred to the microorganisms or their toxins in the blood. The [[International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems]] (ICD) version 9, which was in use in the US until 2013, used the term septicemia with numerous modifiers for different diagnoses, such as "Streptococcal septicemia".<ref name="aapc"/> All those diagnoses have been converted to sepsis, again with modifiers, in [[ICD-10]], such as "Sepsis due to streptococcus".<ref name="aapc">{{Cite web |url=https://www.aapc.com/blog/11406-understand-how-icd-10-expands-sepsis-coding/ |title=Understand How ICD-10 Expands Sepsis Coding – AAPC Knowledge Center | vauthors = Stewart C |website=AAPC |date=8 April 2011 |language=en-US |access-date=2020-02-06}}</ref>
The terms "septicemia", also spelled "septicaemia", and "blood poisoning" referred to the microorganisms or their toxins in the blood. The [[International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems]] (ICD) version 9, which was in use in the US until 2013, used the term septicemia with numerous modifiers for different diagnoses, such as "Streptococcal septicemia".<ref name="aapc"/> All those diagnoses have been converted to sepsis, again with modifiers, in [[ICD-10]], such as "Sepsis due to streptococcus".<ref name="aapc">{{Cite web |url=https://www.aapc.com/blog/11406-understand-how-icd-10-expands-sepsis-coding/ |title=Understand How ICD-10 Expands Sepsis Coding – AAPC Knowledge Center | vauthors = Stewart C |website=AAPC |date=8 April 2011 |language=en-US |access-date=2020-02-06}}</ref>
Line 235: Line 238:
By the end of the 19th century, it was widely believed that [[microbes]] produced substances that could injure the [[mammalian]] host and that soluble [[toxins]] released during infection caused the fever and shock that were commonplace during severe infections. [[Richard Friedrich Johannes Pfeiffer|Pfeiffer]] coined the term [[endotoxin]] at the beginning of the 20th century to denote the pyrogenic principle associated with ''[[Vibrio cholerae]]''. It was soon realized that endotoxins were expressed by most and perhaps all [[gram-negative bacteria]]. The [[lipopolysaccharide]] character of enteric endotoxins was elucidated in 1944 by Shear.<ref name=Shear1944/> The molecular character of this material was determined by Luderitz et al. in 1973.<ref name=Luderitz1973/>
By the end of the 19th century, it was widely believed that [[microbes]] produced substances that could injure the [[mammalian]] host and that soluble [[toxins]] released during infection caused the fever and shock that were commonplace during severe infections. [[Richard Friedrich Johannes Pfeiffer|Pfeiffer]] coined the term [[endotoxin]] at the beginning of the 20th century to denote the pyrogenic principle associated with ''[[Vibrio cholerae]]''. It was soon realized that endotoxins were expressed by most and perhaps all [[gram-negative bacteria]]. The [[lipopolysaccharide]] character of enteric endotoxins was elucidated in 1944 by Shear.<ref name=Shear1944/> The molecular character of this material was determined by Luderitz et al. in 1973.<ref name=Luderitz1973/>


It was discovered in 1965 that a strain of C3H/HeJ [[mouse]] was immune to the endotoxin-induced shock.<ref name=Heppner1965/> The genetic locus for this effect was dubbed ''Lps''. These mice were also found to be hyper-susceptible to infection by gram-negative bacteria.<ref name=Obrien1980/> These observations were finally linked in 1998 by the discovery of the [[toll-like receptor]] gene 4 (TLR 4).<ref name=Poltorak1998/> Genetic mapping work, performed over five years, showed that TLR4 was the sole candidate locus within the Lps critical region; this strongly implied that a mutation within TLR4 must account for the lipopolysaccharide resistance phenotype. The defect in the TLR4 gene that led to the endotoxin-resistant phenotype was discovered to be due to a mutation in the [[cytoplasm]].<ref name=Poltorak1998B/>
It was discovered in 1965 that a strain of [[C3H/HeJ]] [[mouse]] was immune to the endotoxin-induced shock.<ref name=Heppner1965/> The genetic locus for this effect was dubbed ''Lps''. These mice were also found to be hyper-susceptible to infection by gram-negative bacteria.<ref name=Obrien1980/> These observations were finally linked in 1998 by the discovery of the [[toll-like receptor]] gene 4 (TLR 4).<ref name=Poltorak1998/> Genetic mapping work, performed over five years, showed that TLR4 was the sole candidate locus within the Lps critical region; this strongly implied that a mutation within TLR4 must account for the lipopolysaccharide resistance phenotype. The defect in the TLR4 gene that led to the endotoxin-resistant phenotype was discovered to be due to a mutation in the [[cytoplasm]].<ref name=Poltorak1998B/>


Controversy occurred in the scientific community over the use of mouse models in research into sepsis in 2013 when scientists published a review of the mouse immune system compared to the human immune system and showed that on a systems level, the two worked very differently; the authors noted that as of the date of their article over 150 clinical trials of sepsis had been conducted in humans, almost all of them supported by promising data in mice and that all of them had failed. The authors called for abandoning the use of mouse models in sepsis research; others rejected that but called for more caution in interpreting the results of mouse studies,<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Korneev KV | title = [Mouse Models of Sepsis and Septic Shock] | journal = Molekuliarnaia Biologiia | volume = 53 | issue = 5 | pages = 799–814 | date = 18 October 2019 | pmid = 31661479 | doi = 10.1134/S0026893319050108 | s2cid = 204758015 | doi-access = free }}</ref> and more careful design of preclinical studies.<ref name=Lewis2016/><ref name=Mills2016/><ref name=Engber2013/><ref name="pmid23401516"/> One approach is to rely more on studying biopsies and clinical data from people who have had sepsis, to try to identify [[biomarkers]] and [[drug target]]s for intervention.<ref name=Haseldine2016/>
Controversy occurred in the scientific community over the use of mouse models in research into sepsis in 2013 when scientists published a review of the mouse immune system compared to the human immune system and showed that on a systems level, the two worked very differently; the authors noted that as of the date of their article over 150 clinical trials of sepsis had been conducted in humans, almost all of them supported by promising data in mice and that all of them had failed. The authors called for abandoning the use of mouse models in sepsis research; others rejected that but called for more caution in interpreting the results of mouse studies,<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Korneev KV | title = [Mouse Models of Sepsis and Septic Shock] | journal = Molekuliarnaia Biologiia | volume = 53 | issue = 5 | pages = 799–814 | date = 18 October 2019 | pmid = 31661479 | doi = 10.1134/S0026893319050108 | s2cid = 204758015 | doi-access = free }}</ref> and more careful design of preclinical studies.<ref name=Lewis2016/><ref name=Mills2016/><ref name=Engber2013/><ref name="pmid23401516"/> One approach is to rely more on studying biopsies and clinical data from people who have had sepsis, to try to identify [[biomarkers]] and [[drug target]]s for intervention.<ref name=Haseldine2016/>


== Society and culture ==
== Society and culture ==
=== Economics ===
=== Economics ===
Sepsis was the most expensive condition treated in United States' hospital stays in 2013, at an aggregate cost of $23.6 billion for nearly 1.3 million hospitalizations.<ref name=Torio2006/> Costs for sepsis hospital stays more than quadrupled since 1997 with an 11.5 percent annual increase.<ref name=Pfuntner2013/> By payer, it was the most costly condition billed to Medicare and the uninsured, the second-most costly billed to [[Medicaid]], and the fourth-most costly billed to [[health insurance in the United States|private insurance]].<ref name=Torio2006/>
Sepsis was the most expensive condition treated in United States' hospital stays in 2013, at an aggregate cost of $23.6 billion for nearly 1.3 million hospitalizations.<ref name=Torio2006/> Costs for sepsis hospital stays more than quadrupled since 1997 with an 11.5 percent annual increase.<ref name=Pfuntner2013/> By payer, it was the most costly condition billed to Medicare and the uninsured, the second-most costly billed to [[Medicaid]], and the fourth-most costly billed to [[health insurance in the United States|private insurance]].<ref name=Torio2006/>
Line 254: Line 256:
Some authors suggest that initiating sepsis by the normally [[Mutualism (biology)|mutualistic]] (or neutral) members of the [[microbiome]] may not always be an accidental side effect of the deteriorating host immune system. Rather, it is often an [[Adaptive behavior|adaptive]] microbial response to a sudden decline of host survival chances. Under this scenario, the microbe species provoking sepsis benefit from monopolizing the future cadaver, utilizing its biomass as [[decomposer]]s, and then transmitting through soil or water to establish mutualistic relations with new individuals. The bacteria ''[[Streptococcus pneumoniae]]'', ''[[Escherichia coli]]'', ''[[Proteus (bacterium)|Proteus]]'' spp., ''[[Pseudomonas aeruginosa]]'', ''[[Staphylococcus aureus]]'', ''[[Klebsiella]]'' spp., ''[[Clostridium]]'' spp., ''[[Lactobacillus]]'' spp., ''[[Bacteroides]]'' spp. and the fungi ''[[Candida (fungus)|Candida]]'' spp. are all capable of such a high level of [[phenotypic plasticity]]. Not all cases of sepsis arise through such adaptive microbial strategy switches.<ref name=Rozsa2017/>
Some authors suggest that initiating sepsis by the normally [[Mutualism (biology)|mutualistic]] (or neutral) members of the [[microbiome]] may not always be an accidental side effect of the deteriorating host immune system. Rather, it is often an [[Adaptive behavior|adaptive]] microbial response to a sudden decline of host survival chances. Under this scenario, the microbe species provoking sepsis benefit from monopolizing the future cadaver, utilizing its biomass as [[decomposer]]s, and then transmitting through soil or water to establish mutualistic relations with new individuals. The bacteria ''[[Streptococcus pneumoniae]]'', ''[[Escherichia coli]]'', ''[[Proteus (bacterium)|Proteus]]'' spp., ''[[Pseudomonas aeruginosa]]'', ''[[Staphylococcus aureus]]'', ''[[Klebsiella]]'' spp., ''[[Clostridium]]'' spp., ''[[Lactobacillus]]'' spp., ''[[Bacteroides]]'' spp. and the fungi ''[[Candida (fungus)|Candida]]'' spp. are all capable of such a high level of [[phenotypic plasticity]]. Not all cases of sepsis arise through such adaptive microbial strategy switches.<ref name=Rozsa2017/>


[[Paul E. Marik]]'s "Marik protocol", also known as the "HAT" protocol, proposed a combination of [[hydrocortisone]], [[vitamin C]], and [[thiamine]] as a treatment for preventing sepsis for people in [[intensive care]]. Marik's initial research, published in 2017, showed dramatic evidence of benefit, leading to the protocol becoming popular among intensive care physicians, especially after the protocol received attention on social media and [[National Public Radio]], leading to criticism of [[science by press conference]] from the wider medical community. Subsequent independent research failed to replicate Marik's positive results, indicating the possibility that they had been compromised by bias.<ref name=jama>{{cite journal | vauthors = Rubin R | title = Wide Interest in a Vitamin C Drug Cocktail for Sepsis Despite Lagging Evidence | journal = JAMA | volume = 322 | issue = 4 | pages = 291–293 | date = July 2019 | pmid = 31268477 | doi = 10.1001/jama.2019.7936 | s2cid = 195788169 }}</ref> A [[systematic review]] of trials in 2021 found that the claimed benefits of the protocol could not be confirmed.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Lee YR, Vo K, Varughese JT | title = Benefits of combination therapy of hydrocortisone, ascorbic acid and thiamine in sepsis and septic shock: A systematic review | journal = Nutrition and Health | volume = 28 | issue = 1 | pages = 77–93 | date = March 2022 | pmid = 34039089 | doi = 10.1177/02601060211018371 | s2cid = 235215735 }}</ref>
[[Paul E. Marik]]'s "Marik protocol", also known as the "HAT" protocol, proposed a combination of [[hydrocortisone]], [[vitamin C|vitamin&nbsp;C]], and [[thiamine]] as a treatment for preventing sepsis for people in [[intensive care]]. Marik's initial research, published in 2017, showed dramatic evidence of benefit, leading to the protocol becoming popular among intensive care physicians, especially after the protocol received attention on social media and [[National Public Radio]], leading to criticism of [[science by press conference]] from the wider medical community. Subsequent independent research failed to replicate Marik's positive results, indicating the possibility that they had been compromised by bias.<ref name=jama>{{cite journal | vauthors = Rubin R | title = Wide Interest in a Vitamin C Drug Cocktail for Sepsis Despite Lagging Evidence | journal = JAMA | volume = 322 | issue = 4 | pages = 291–293 | date = July 2019 | pmid = 31268477 | doi = 10.1001/jama.2019.7936 | s2cid = 195788169 }}</ref> A [[systematic review]] of trials in 2021 found that the claimed benefits of the protocol could not be confirmed.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Lee YR, Vo K, Varughese JT | title = Benefits of combination therapy of hydrocortisone, ascorbic acid and thiamine in sepsis and septic shock: A systematic review | journal = Nutrition and Health | volume = 28 | issue = 1 | pages = 77–93 | date = March 2022 | pmid = 34039089 | doi = 10.1177/02601060211018371 | s2cid = 235215735 }}</ref>


Overall, the evidence for any role of vitamin C in the treatment of sepsis remains unclear {{as of|lc=yes|2021}}.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Li YR, Zhu H | title = Vitamin C for sepsis intervention: from redox biochemistry to clinical medicine | journal = Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry | volume = 476 | issue = 12 | pages = 4449–4460 | date = December 2021 | pmid = 34478032 | pmc = 8413356 | doi = 10.1007/s11010-021-04240-z }}</ref>
Overall, the evidence for any role of vitamin&nbsp;C in the treatment of sepsis remains unclear {{as of|lc=yes|2021}}.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Li YR, Zhu H | title = Vitamin C for sepsis intervention: from redox biochemistry to clinical medicine | journal = Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry | volume = 476 | issue = 12 | pages = 4449–4460 | date = December 2021 | pmid = 34478032 | pmc = 8413356 | doi = 10.1007/s11010-021-04240-z }}</ref>


== See also ==
== See also ==
 
* ''[[Capnocytophaga canimorsus]]'' – bacteria that can lead to [[purpura fulminans]] and severe acute sepsis after a dog bite
* [[Capnocytophaga canimorsus]] – bacteria that can lead to [[purpura fulminans]] and severe acute sepsis after a dog bite


{{Clear}}
{{Clear}}
Line 269: Line 270:
<ref name=CDC2014Q>{{cite web |title= Sepsis Questions and Answers |url= https://www.cdc.gov/sepsis/basic/qa.html |website= cdc.gov |publisher= [[Centers for Disease Control and Prevention]] (CDC) |access-date= 28 November 2014 |date= 22 May 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20141204083832/http://www.cdc.gov/sepsis/basic/qa.html |archive-date= 4 December 2014 }}</ref>
<ref name=CDC2014Q>{{cite web |title= Sepsis Questions and Answers |url= https://www.cdc.gov/sepsis/basic/qa.html |website= cdc.gov |publisher= [[Centers for Disease Control and Prevention]] (CDC) |access-date= 28 November 2014 |date= 22 May 2014 |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20141204083832/http://www.cdc.gov/sepsis/basic/qa.html |archive-date= 4 December 2014 }}</ref>


<ref name=Tint2011>{{cite book | vauthors = Jui J |chapter= Ch. 146: Septic Shock | veditors = Tintinalli JE, Stapczynski JS, Ma OJ, Cline DM, Cydulka RK, Meckler GD | collaboration = [[American College of Emergency Physicians]] |title= Tintinalli's Emergency Medicine: A Comprehensive Study Guide |edition= 7th |location= New York |publisher= [[McGraw-Hill Education|McGraw-Hill]] |pages= 1003–14 |year= 2011 |isbn=9780071484800 }}</ref>
<ref name=Tint2011>{{cite book | vauthors = Jui J |chapter= Ch. 146: Septic Shock | veditors = Tintinalli JE, Stapczynski JS, Ma OJ, Cline DM, Cydulka RK, Meckler GD | collaboration = [[American College of Emergency Physicians]] |title= Tintinalli's Emergency Medicine: A Comprehensive Study Guide |edition= 7th |location= New York |publisher= [[McGraw-Hill Education|McGraw-Hill]] |pages= 1003–14 |year= 2011 |isbn=978-0-07-148480-0 }}</ref>


<ref name="Deutschman2014">{{cite journal | vauthors = Deutschman CS, Tracey KJ | title = Sepsis: current dogma and new perspectives | journal = Immunity | volume = 40 | issue = 4 | pages = 463–475 | date = April 2014 | pmid = 24745331 | doi = 10.1016/j.immuni.2014.04.001 | name-list-style = vanc | doi-access = free }}</ref>
<ref name="Deutschman2014">{{cite journal | vauthors = Deutschman CS, Tracey KJ | title = Sepsis: current dogma and new perspectives | journal = Immunity | volume = 40 | issue = 4 | pages = 463–475 | date = April 2014 | pmid = 24745331 | doi = 10.1016/j.immuni.2014.04.001 | name-list-style = vanc | doi-access = free }}</ref>
Line 289: Line 290:
<ref name="pmid12682500">{{cite journal | vauthors = Levy MM, Fink MP, Marshall JC, Abraham E, Angus D, Cook D, Cohen J, Opal SM, Vincent JL, Ramsay G | display-authors = 6 | title = 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference | journal = Critical Care Medicine | volume = 31 | issue = 4 | pages = 1250–1256 | date = April 2003 | pmid = 12682500 | doi = 10.1097/01.CCM.0000050454.01978.3B | url = http://www.esicm.org/upload/file4.pdf | url-status = live | s2cid = 19605781 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20150924002142/http://www.esicm.org/upload/file4.pdf | archive-date = 24 September 2015 }}</ref>
<ref name="pmid12682500">{{cite journal | vauthors = Levy MM, Fink MP, Marshall JC, Abraham E, Angus D, Cook D, Cohen J, Opal SM, Vincent JL, Ramsay G | display-authors = 6 | title = 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference | journal = Critical Care Medicine | volume = 31 | issue = 4 | pages = 1250–1256 | date = April 2003 | pmid = 12682500 | doi = 10.1097/01.CCM.0000050454.01978.3B | url = http://www.esicm.org/upload/file4.pdf | url-status = live | s2cid = 19605781 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20150924002142/http://www.esicm.org/upload/file4.pdf | archive-date = 24 September 2015 }}</ref>


<ref name=Hospital2012>{{cite book | veditors = McKean S, Ross JJ, Dressler DD, Brotman DJ, Ginsberg JS  |title= Principles and Practice of Hospital Medicine |year= 2012 |publisher= [[McGraw-Hill Education|McGraw-Hill]] |location= New York |isbn= 978-0071603898 |chapter= Ch. 138: Sepsis | vauthors = Felner K, Smith RL |pages= 1099–109}}</ref>
<ref name=Hospital2012>{{cite book | veditors = McKean S, Ross JJ, Dressler DD, Brotman DJ, Ginsberg JS  |title= Principles and Practice of Hospital Medicine |year= 2012 |publisher= [[McGraw-Hill Education|McGraw-Hill]] |location= New York |isbn= 978-0-07-160389-8 |chapter= Ch. 138: Sepsis | vauthors = Felner K, Smith RL |pages= 1099–109}}</ref>


<ref name=MedLP>{{MedlinePlusEncyclopedia|000666|Sepsis}}. Retrieved 29 November 2014.</ref>
<ref name=MedLP>{{MedlinePlusEncyclopedia|000666|Sepsis}}. Retrieved 29 November 2014.</ref>


<ref name= "Mandell2014">{{cite book | veditors = Bennett JE, Dolin R, Blaser MJ |editor3-link=Martin J. Blaser  |year= 2014 |title= Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett's Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases |location= Philadelphia |publisher= [[Elsevier|Elsevier Health Sciences]] |isbn= 9780323263733 | vauthors = Munford RS, Suffredini AF |chapter= Ch. 75: Sepsis, Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock |chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=73pYBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA914 |pages= 914–34 |edition= 8th}}</ref>
<ref name= "Mandell2014">{{cite book | veditors = Bennett JE, Dolin R, Blaser MJ |editor3-link=Martin J. Blaser  |year= 2014 |title= Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett's Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases |location= Philadelphia |publisher= [[Elsevier|Elsevier Health Sciences]] |isbn= 978-0-323-26373-3 | vauthors = Munford RS, Suffredini AF |chapter= Ch. 75: Sepsis, Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock |chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=73pYBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA914 |pages= 914–34 |edition= 8th}}</ref>


<ref name="Polat">{{cite journal | vauthors = Polat G, Ugan RA, Cadirci E, Halici Z | title = Sepsis and Septic Shock: Current Treatment Strategies and New Approaches | journal = The Eurasian Journal of Medicine | volume = 49 | issue = 1 | pages = 53–58 | date = February 2017 | pmid = 28416934 | pmc = 5389495 | doi = 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2017.17062 }}</ref>
<ref name="Polat">{{cite journal | vauthors = Polat G, Ugan RA, Cadirci E, Halici Z | title = Sepsis and Septic Shock: Current Treatment Strategies and New Approaches | journal = The Eurasian Journal of Medicine | volume = 49 | issue = 1 | pages = 53–58 | date = February 2017 | pmid = 28416934 | pmc = 5389495 | doi = 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2017.17062 }}</ref>


<ref name="BlochID">{{cite book | vauthors = Bloch KC |chapter= Ch. 4: Infectious Diseases | veditors = McPhee SJ, Hammer GD |title= Pathophysiology of Disease |edition= 6th |location= New York |publisher= [[McGraw-Hill Education|McGraw-Hill]] |year= 2009 |isbn= 9780071621670 }}</ref>
<ref name="BlochID">{{cite book | vauthors = Bloch KC |chapter= Ch. 4: Infectious Diseases | veditors = McPhee SJ, Hammer GD |title= Pathophysiology of Disease |edition= 6th |location= New York |publisher= [[McGraw-Hill Education|McGraw-Hill]] |year= 2009 |isbn= 978-0-07-162167-0 }}</ref>


<ref name="Ramachandran2014">{{cite journal | vauthors = Ramachandran G | title = Gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial toxins in sepsis: a brief review | journal = Virulence | volume = 5 | issue = 1 | pages = 213–218 | date = January 2014 | pmid = 24193365 | pmc = 3916377 | doi = 10.4161/viru.27024 }}</ref>
<ref name="Ramachandran2014">{{cite journal | vauthors = Ramachandran G | title = Gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial toxins in sepsis: a brief review | journal = Virulence | volume = 5 | issue = 1 | pages = 213–218 | date = January 2014 | pmid = 24193365 | pmc = 3916377 | doi = 10.4161/viru.27024 }}</ref>
Line 313: Line 314:
<ref name=Simpson2016>{{cite journal | vauthors = Simpson SQ | title = New Sepsis Criteria: A Change We Should Not Make | journal = Chest | volume = 149 | issue = 5 | pages = 1117–1118 | date = May 2016 | pmid = 26927525 | doi = 10.1016/j.chest.2016.02.653 | quote = We believe that adopting a more restrictive definition that requires further progression along the sepsis pathway may delay intervention in this highly time-dependent condition, with additional risk to patients. | doi-access = free }}</ref>
<ref name=Simpson2016>{{cite journal | vauthors = Simpson SQ | title = New Sepsis Criteria: A Change We Should Not Make | journal = Chest | volume = 149 | issue = 5 | pages = 1117–1118 | date = May 2016 | pmid = 26927525 | doi = 10.1016/j.chest.2016.02.653 | quote = We believe that adopting a more restrictive definition that requires further progression along the sepsis pathway may delay intervention in this highly time-dependent condition, with additional risk to patients. | doi-access = free }}</ref>


<ref name=Vincent2016>{{cite journal | vauthors = Vincent JL, Martin GS, Levy MM | title = qSOFA does not replace SIRS in the definition of sepsis | journal = Critical Care | volume = 20 | issue = 1 | pages = 210 | date = July 2016 | pmid = 27423462 | pmc = 4947518 | doi = 10.1186/s13054-016-1389-z | quote = We hope this editorial will clarify that the qSOFA is meant to be used to raise suspicion of sepsis and prompt further action—it is not a replacement for SIRS and is not part of the definition of sepsis. | doi-access = free }}</ref>
<ref name=Vincent2016>{{cite journal | vauthors = Vincent JL, Martin GS, Levy MM | title = qSOFA does not replace SIRS in the definition of sepsis | journal = Critical Care | volume = 20 | issue = 1 | article-number = 210 | date = July 2016 | pmid = 27423462 | pmc = 4947518 | doi = 10.1186/s13054-016-1389-z | quote = We hope this editorial will clarify that the qSOFA is meant to be used to raise suspicion of sepsis and prompt further action—it is not a replacement for SIRS and is not part of the definition of sepsis. | doi-access = free }}</ref>


<ref name=Fernando2018>{{cite journal | vauthors = Fernando SM, Tran A, Taljaard M, Cheng W, Rochwerg B, Seely AJ, Perry JJ | title = Prognostic Accuracy of the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment for Mortality in Patients With Suspected Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis | journal = Annals of Internal Medicine | volume = 168 | issue = 4 | pages = 266–275 | date = February 2018 | pmid = 29404582 | doi = 10.7326/M17-2820 | s2cid = 3441582 }}</ref>
<ref name=Fernando2018>{{cite journal | vauthors = Fernando SM, Tran A, Taljaard M, Cheng W, Rochwerg B, Seely AJ, Perry JJ | title = Prognostic Accuracy of the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment for Mortality in Patients With Suspected Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis | journal = Annals of Internal Medicine | volume = 168 | issue = 4 | pages = 266–275 | date = February 2018 | pmid = 29404582 | doi = 10.7326/M17-2820 | s2cid = 3441582 }}</ref>
Line 327: Line 328:
<ref name=Machowicz2017>{{cite journal | vauthors = Machowicz R, Janka G, Wiktor-Jedrzejczak W | title = Similar but not the same: Differential diagnosis of HLH and sepsis | journal = Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology | volume = 114 | pages = 1–12 | date = June 2017 | pmid = 28477737 | doi = 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2017.03.023 }}</ref>
<ref name=Machowicz2017>{{cite journal | vauthors = Machowicz R, Janka G, Wiktor-Jedrzejczak W | title = Similar but not the same: Differential diagnosis of HLH and sepsis | journal = Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology | volume = 114 | pages = 1–12 | date = June 2017 | pmid = 28477737 | doi = 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2017.03.023 }}</ref>


<ref name="Satar2012">{{cite journal | vauthors = Satar M, Ozlü F | title = Neonatal sepsis: a continuing disease burden | journal = The Turkish Journal of Pediatrics | volume = 54 | issue = 5 | pages = 449–457 | date = September 2012 | pmid = 23427506 | url = http://www.turkishjournalpediatrics.org/pediatrics/pdf/pdf_TJP_1099.pdf | url-status = dead | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20141219145816/http://www.turkishjournalpediatrics.org/pediatrics/pdf/pdf_TJP_1099.pdf | archive-date = 19 December 2014 }}</ref>
<ref name="Satar2012">{{cite journal | vauthors = Satar M, Ozlü F | title = Neonatal sepsis: a continuing disease burden | journal = The Turkish Journal of Pediatrics | volume = 54 | issue = 5 | pages = 449–457 | date = September 2012 | pmid = 23427506 | url = http://www.turkishjournalpediatrics.org/pediatrics/pdf/pdf_TJP_1099.pdf | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20141219145816/http://www.turkishjournalpediatrics.org/pediatrics/pdf/pdf_TJP_1099.pdf | archive-date = 19 December 2014 }}</ref>


<ref name=Critical2005>{{cite book | veditors = Hall JB, Schmidt GA, Wood LD | vauthors = Ely EW, Goyette RE |chapter= Ch. 46: Sepsis with Acute Organ Dysfunction |title= Principles of Critical Care |year= 2005 |publisher= [[McGraw-Hill Education|McGraw-Hill Medical]] |location= New York |isbn= 978-0071416405 |edition= 3rd}}</ref>
<ref name=Critical2005>{{cite book | veditors = Hall JB, Schmidt GA, Wood LD | vauthors = Ely EW, Goyette RE |chapter= Ch. 46: Sepsis with Acute Organ Dysfunction |title= Principles of Critical Care |year= 2005 |publisher= [[McGraw-Hill Education|McGraw-Hill Medical]] |location= New York |isbn= 978-0-07-141640-5 |edition= 3rd}}</ref>


<ref name=Shukla2014>{{cite journal | vauthors = Shukla P, Rao GM, Pandey G, Sharma S, Mittapelly N, Shegokar R, Mishra PR | title = Therapeutic interventions in sepsis: current and anticipated pharmacological agents | journal = British Journal of Pharmacology | volume = 171 | issue = 22 | pages = 5011–5031 | date = November 2014 | pmid = 24977655 | pmc = 4253453 | doi = 10.1111/bph.12829 }}</ref>
<ref name=Shukla2014>{{cite journal | vauthors = Shukla P, Rao GM, Pandey G, Sharma S, Mittapelly N, Shegokar R, Mishra PR | title = Therapeutic interventions in sepsis: current and anticipated pharmacological agents | journal = British Journal of Pharmacology | volume = 171 | issue = 22 | pages = 5011–5031 | date = November 2014 | pmid = 24977655 | pmc = 4253453 | doi = 10.1111/bph.12829 }}</ref>
Line 345: Line 346:
<ref name="Yuki">{{cite journal | vauthors = Yuki K, Murakami N | title = Sepsis pathophysiology and anesthetic consideration | journal = Cardiovascular & Hematological Disorders Drug Targets | volume = 15 | issue = 1 | pages = 57–69 | date = 6 January 2016 | pmid = 25567335 | pmc = 4704087 | doi = 10.2174/1871529x15666150108114810 }}</ref>
<ref name="Yuki">{{cite journal | vauthors = Yuki K, Murakami N | title = Sepsis pathophysiology and anesthetic consideration | journal = Cardiovascular & Hematological Disorders Drug Targets | volume = 15 | issue = 1 | pages = 57–69 | date = 6 January 2016 | pmid = 25567335 | pmc = 4704087 | doi = 10.2174/1871529x15666150108114810 }}</ref>


<ref name=Fujishima2016>{{cite journal | vauthors = Fujishima S | title = Organ dysfunction as a new standard for defining sepsis | journal = Inflammation and Regeneration | volume = 36 | issue = 24 | pages = 24 | date = 1 November 2016 | pmid = 29259697 | pmc = 5725936 | doi = 10.1186/s41232-016-0029-y | doi-access = free }}</ref>
<ref name=Fujishima2016>{{cite journal | vauthors = Fujishima S | title = Organ dysfunction as a new standard for defining sepsis | journal = Inflammation and Regeneration | volume = 36 | issue = 24 | article-number = 24 | date = 1 November 2016 | pmid = 29259697 | pmc = 5725936 | doi = 10.1186/s41232-016-0029-y | doi-access = free }}</ref>


<ref name= Nimah2003>{{cite journal | vauthors = Nimah M, Brilli RJ | title = Coagulation dysfunction in sepsis and multiple organ system failure | journal = Critical Care Clinics | volume = 19 | issue = 3 | pages = 441–458 | date = July 2003 | pmid = 12848314 | doi = 10.1016/s0749-0704(03)00008-3 }}</ref>
<ref name= Nimah2003>{{cite journal | vauthors = Nimah M, Brilli RJ | title = Coagulation dysfunction in sepsis and multiple organ system failure | journal = Critical Care Clinics | volume = 19 | issue = 3 | pages = 441–458 | date = July 2003 | pmid = 12848314 | doi = 10.1016/s0749-0704(03)00008-3 }}</ref>


<ref name="Marik2014">{{cite journal | vauthors = Marik PE | title = Iatrogenic salt water drowning and the hazards of a high central venous pressure | journal = Annals of Intensive Care | volume = 4 | pages = 21 | date = June 2014 | pmid = 25110606 | pmc = 4122823 | doi = 10.1186/s13613-014-0021-0 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
<ref name="Marik2014">{{cite journal | vauthors = Marik PE | title = Iatrogenic salt water drowning and the hazards of a high central venous pressure | journal = Annals of Intensive Care | volume = 4 | article-number = 21 | date = June 2014 | pmid = 25110606 | pmc = 4122823 | doi = 10.1186/s13613-014-0021-0 | doi-access = free }}</ref>


<ref name="Marik2014Chest">{{cite journal | vauthors = Marik PE | title = Early management of severe sepsis: concepts and controversies | journal = Chest | volume = 145 | issue = 6 | pages = 1407–1418 | date = June 2014 | pmid = 24889440 | doi = 10.1378/chest.13-2104 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.661.7518 }}</ref>
<ref name="Marik2014Chest">{{cite journal | vauthors = Marik PE | title = Early management of severe sepsis: concepts and controversies | journal = Chest | volume = 145 | issue = 6 | pages = 1407–1418 | date = June 2014 | pmid = 24889440 | doi = 10.1378/chest.13-2104 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.661.7518 }}</ref>
Line 355: Line 356:
<ref name=Daniels2011>{{cite journal | vauthors = Daniels R | title = Surviving the first hours in sepsis: getting the basics right (an intensivist's perspective) | journal = The Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy | volume = 66 | issue = Suppl 2 | pages = ii11–ii23 | date = April 2011 | pmid = 21398303 | doi = 10.1093/jac/dkq515 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
<ref name=Daniels2011>{{cite journal | vauthors = Daniels R | title = Surviving the first hours in sepsis: getting the basics right (an intensivist's perspective) | journal = The Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy | volume = 66 | issue = Suppl 2 | pages = ii11–ii23 | date = April 2011 | pmid = 21398303 | doi = 10.1093/jac/dkq515 | doi-access = free }}</ref>


<ref name=SIGN139>{{cite book | author=Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) | author-link=Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network |series=Guideline 139 |title= Care of Deteriorating Patients | location=Edinburgh | publisher=SIGN | date=May 2014 | url=http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/SIGN139.pdf | isbn=978-1-909103-26-9 | url-status=dead | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140811121805/http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/SIGN139.pdf | archive-date=11 August 2014 | df=dmy-all | access-date=6 December 2014 }}</ref>
<ref name=SIGN139>{{cite book | author=Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) | author-link=Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network |series=Guideline 139 |title= Care of Deteriorating Patients | location=Edinburgh | publisher=SIGN | date=May 2014 | url=http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/SIGN139.pdf | isbn=978-1-909103-26-9 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140811121805/http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/SIGN139.pdf | archive-date=11 August 2014 | access-date=6 December 2014 }}</ref>


<ref name=Sterling2015>{{cite journal | vauthors = Sterling SA, Miller WR, Pryor J, Puskarich MA, Jones AE | title = The Impact of Timing of Antibiotics on Outcomes in Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis | journal = Critical Care Medicine | volume = 43 | issue = 9 | pages = 1907–1915 | date = September 2015 | pmid = 26121073 | pmc = 4597314 | doi = 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001142 }}</ref>
<ref name=Sterling2015>{{cite journal | vauthors = Sterling SA, Miller WR, Pryor J, Puskarich MA, Jones AE | title = The Impact of Timing of Antibiotics on Outcomes in Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis | journal = Critical Care Medicine | volume = 43 | issue = 9 | pages = 1907–1915 | date = September 2015 | pmid = 26121073 | pmc = 4597314 | doi = 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001142 }}</ref>
Line 363: Line 364:
<ref name="de Caen2015">{{cite journal | vauthors = de Caen AR, Berg MD, Chameides L, Gooden CK, Hickey RW, Scott HF, Sutton RM, Tijssen JA, Topjian A, van der Jagt ÉW, Schexnayder SM, Samson RA | display-authors = 6 | title = Part 12: Pediatric Advanced Life Support: 2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care | journal = Circulation | volume = 132 | issue = 18 Suppl 2 | pages = S526–S542 | date = November 2015 | pmid = 26473000 | pmc = 6191296 | doi = 10.1161/cir.0000000000000266 }}</ref>
<ref name="de Caen2015">{{cite journal | vauthors = de Caen AR, Berg MD, Chameides L, Gooden CK, Hickey RW, Scott HF, Sutton RM, Tijssen JA, Topjian A, van der Jagt ÉW, Schexnayder SM, Samson RA | display-authors = 6 | title = Part 12: Pediatric Advanced Life Support: 2015 American Heart Association Guidelines Update for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care | journal = Circulation | volume = 132 | issue = 18 Suppl 2 | pages = S526–S542 | date = November 2015 | pmid = 26473000 | pmc = 6191296 | doi = 10.1161/cir.0000000000000266 }}</ref>


<ref name=Lew2018>{{cite journal | vauthors = Lewis SR, Pritchard MW, Evans DJ, Butler AR, Alderson P, Smith AF, Roberts I | title = Colloids versus crystalloids for fluid resuscitation in critically ill people | journal = The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews | volume = 8 | pages = CD000567 | date = August 2018 | issue = 8 | pmid = 30073665 | pmc = 6513027 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD000567.pub7 }}</ref>
<ref name=Lew2018>{{cite journal | vauthors = Lewis SR, Pritchard MW, Evans DJ, Butler AR, Alderson P, Smith AF, Roberts I | title = Colloids versus crystalloids for fluid resuscitation in critically ill people | journal = The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews | volume = 8 | article-number = CD000567 | date = August 2018 | issue = 8 | pmid = 30073665 | pmc = 6513027 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD000567.pub7 }}</ref>


<ref name= Zarychanski2013>{{cite journal | vauthors = Zarychanski R, Abou-Setta AM, Turgeon AF, Houston BL, McIntyre L, Marshall JC, Fergusson DA | title = Association of hydroxyethyl starch administration with mortality and acute kidney injury in critically ill patients requiring volume resuscitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis | journal = JAMA | volume = 309 | issue = 7 | pages = 678–688 | date = February 2013 | pmid = 23423413 | doi = 10.1001/jama.2013.430 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
<ref name= Zarychanski2013>{{cite journal | vauthors = Zarychanski R, Abou-Setta AM, Turgeon AF, Houston BL, McIntyre L, Marshall JC, Fergusson DA | title = Association of hydroxyethyl starch administration with mortality and acute kidney injury in critically ill patients requiring volume resuscitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis | journal = JAMA | volume = 309 | issue = 7 | pages = 678–688 | date = February 2013 | pmid = 23423413 | doi = 10.1001/jama.2013.430 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
Line 371: Line 372:
<ref name=Serpa2014>{{cite journal | vauthors = Serpa Neto A, Veelo DP, Peireira VG, de Assunção MS, Manetta JA, Espósito DC, Schultz MJ | title = Fluid resuscitation with hydroxyethyl starches in patients with sepsis is associated with an increased incidence of acute kidney injury and use of renal replacement therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature | journal = Journal of Critical Care | volume = 29 | issue = 1 | pages = 185.e1–185.e7 | date = February 2014 | pmid = 24262273 | doi = 10.1016/j.jcrc.2013.09.031 }}</ref>
<ref name=Serpa2014>{{cite journal | vauthors = Serpa Neto A, Veelo DP, Peireira VG, de Assunção MS, Manetta JA, Espósito DC, Schultz MJ | title = Fluid resuscitation with hydroxyethyl starches in patients with sepsis is associated with an increased incidence of acute kidney injury and use of renal replacement therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature | journal = Journal of Critical Care | volume = 29 | issue = 1 | pages = 185.e1–185.e7 | date = February 2014 | pmid = 24262273 | doi = 10.1016/j.jcrc.2013.09.031 }}</ref>


<ref name=Patel2014>{{cite journal | vauthors = Patel A, Laffan MA, Waheed U, Brett SJ | title = Randomised trials of human albumin for adults with sepsis: systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of all-cause mortality | journal = BMJ | volume = 349 | pages = g4561 | date = July 2014 | pmid = 25099709 | pmc = 4106199 | doi = 10.1136/bmj.g4561 }}</ref>
<ref name=Patel2014>{{cite journal | vauthors = Patel A, Laffan MA, Waheed U, Brett SJ | title = Randomised trials of human albumin for adults with sepsis: systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis of all-cause mortality | journal = BMJ | volume = 349 | article-number = g4561 | date = July 2014 | pmid = 25099709 | pmc = 4106199 | doi = 10.1136/bmj.g4561 }}</ref>


<ref name=Holst2014>{{cite journal | vauthors = Holst LB, Haase N, Wetterslev J, Wernerman J, Guttormsen AB, Karlsson S, Johansson PI, Aneman A, Vang ML, Winding R, Nebrich L, Nibro HL, Rasmussen BS, Lauridsen JR, Nielsen JS, Oldner A, Pettilä V, Cronhjort MB, Andersen LH, Pedersen UG, Reiter N, Wiis J, White JO, Russell L, Thornberg KJ, Hjortrup PB, Müller RG, Møller MH, Steensen M, Tjäder I, Kilsand K, Odeberg-Wernerman S, Sjøbø B, Bundgaard H, Thyø MA, Lodahl D, Mærkedahl R, Albeck C, Illum D, Kruse M, Winkel P, Perner A | display-authors = 6 | title = Lower versus higher hemoglobin threshold for transfusion in septic shock | journal = The New England Journal of Medicine | volume = 371 | issue = 15 | pages = 1381–1391 | date = October 2014 | pmid = 25270275 | doi = 10.1056/NEJMoa1406617 | s2cid = 16280618 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
<ref name=Holst2014>{{cite journal | vauthors = Holst LB, Haase N, Wetterslev J, Wernerman J, Guttormsen AB, Karlsson S, Johansson PI, Aneman A, Vang ML, Winding R, Nebrich L, Nibro HL, Rasmussen BS, Lauridsen JR, Nielsen JS, Oldner A, Pettilä V, Cronhjort MB, Andersen LH, Pedersen UG, Reiter N, Wiis J, White JO, Russell L, Thornberg KJ, Hjortrup PB, Müller RG, Møller MH, Steensen M, Tjäder I, Kilsand K, Odeberg-Wernerman S, Sjøbø B, Bundgaard H, Thyø MA, Lodahl D, Mærkedahl R, Albeck C, Illum D, Kruse M, Winkel P, Perner A | display-authors = 6 | title = Lower versus higher hemoglobin threshold for transfusion in septic shock | journal = The New England Journal of Medicine | volume = 371 | issue = 15 | pages = 1381–1391 | date = October 2014 | pmid = 25270275 | doi = 10.1056/NEJMoa1406617 | s2cid = 16280618 | doi-access = free }}</ref>


<ref name="Alejandria2013">{{cite journal | vauthors = Alejandria MM, Lansang MA, Dans LF, Mantaring JB | title = Intravenous immunoglobulin for treating sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock | journal = The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews | volume = 9 | issue = 9 | pages = CD001090 | date = September 2013 | pmid = 24043371 | pmc = 6516813 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD001090.pub2 }}</ref>
<ref name="Alejandria2013">{{cite journal | vauthors = Alejandria MM, Lansang MA, Dans LF, Mantaring JB | title = Intravenous immunoglobulin for treating sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock | journal = The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews | volume = 9 | issue = 9 | article-number = CD001090 | date = September 2013 | pmid = 24043371 | pmc = 6516813 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD001090.pub2 }}</ref>


<ref name=Avni2015>{{cite journal | vauthors = Avni T, Lador A, Lev S, Leibovici L, Paul M, Grossman A | title = Vasopressors for the Treatment of Septic Shock: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis | journal = PLOS ONE | volume = 10 | issue = 8 | pages = e0129305 | date = 2015 | pmid = 26237037 | pmc = 4523170 | doi = 10.1371/journal.pone.0129305 | doi-access = free | bibcode = 2015PLoSO..1029305A }}</ref>
<ref name=Avni2015>{{cite journal | vauthors = Avni T, Lador A, Lev S, Leibovici L, Paul M, Grossman A | title = Vasopressors for the Treatment of Septic Shock: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis | journal = PLOS ONE | volume = 10 | issue = 8 | article-number = e0129305 | date = 2015 | pmid = 26237037 | pmc = 4523170 | doi = 10.1371/journal.pone.0129305 | doi-access = free | bibcode = 2015PLoSO..1029305A }}</ref>


<ref name=Hamzaoui2017>{{cite journal | vauthors = Hamzaoui O, Scheeren TW, Teboul JL | title = Norepinephrine in septic shock: when and how much? | journal = Current Opinion in Critical Care | volume = 23 | issue = 4 | pages = 342–347 | date = August 2017 | pmid = 28509668 | doi = 10.1097/mcc.0000000000000418 | s2cid = 2078670 }}</ref>
<ref name=Hamzaoui2017>{{cite journal | vauthors = Hamzaoui O, Scheeren TW, Teboul JL | title = Norepinephrine in septic shock: when and how much? | journal = Current Opinion in Critical Care | volume = 23 | issue = 4 | pages = 342–347 | date = August 2017 | pmid = 28509668 | doi = 10.1097/mcc.0000000000000418 | s2cid = 2078670 }}</ref>
Line 417: Line 418:
<ref name=Drewry2017>{{cite journal | vauthors = Drewry AM, Ablordeppey EA, Murray ET, Stoll CR, Izadi SR, Dalton CM, Hardi AC, Fowler SA, Fuller BM, Colditz GA | display-authors = 6 | title = Antipyretic Therapy in Critically Ill Septic Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis | journal = Critical Care Medicine | volume = 45 | issue = 5 | pages = 806–813 | date = May 2017 | pmid = 28221185 | pmc = 5389594 | doi = 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002285 }}</ref>
<ref name=Drewry2017>{{cite journal | vauthors = Drewry AM, Ablordeppey EA, Murray ET, Stoll CR, Izadi SR, Dalton CM, Hardi AC, Fowler SA, Fuller BM, Colditz GA | display-authors = 6 | title = Antipyretic Therapy in Critically Ill Septic Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis | journal = Critical Care Medicine | volume = 45 | issue = 5 | pages = 806–813 | date = May 2017 | pmid = 28221185 | pmc = 5389594 | doi = 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002285 }}</ref>


<ref name=Niven2013>{{cite journal | vauthors = Niven DJ, Laupland KB, Tabah A, Vesin A, Rello J, Koulenti D, Dimopoulos G, de Waele J, Timsit JF | display-authors = 6 | title = Diagnosis and management of temperature abnormality in ICUs: a EUROBACT investigators' survey | journal = Critical Care | volume = 17 | issue = 6 | pages = R289 | date = December 2013 | pmid = 24326145 | pmc = 4057370 | doi = 10.1186/cc13153 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
<ref name=Niven2013>{{cite journal | vauthors = Niven DJ, Laupland KB, Tabah A, Vesin A, Rello J, Koulenti D, Dimopoulos G, de Waele J, Timsit JF | display-authors = 6 | title = Diagnosis and management of temperature abnormality in ICUs: a EUROBACT investigators' survey | journal = Critical Care | volume = 17 | issue = 6 | article-number = R289 | date = December 2013 | pmid = 24326145 | pmc = 4057370 | doi = 10.1186/cc13153 | doi-access = free }}</ref>


<ref name=Launey2011>{{cite journal | vauthors = Launey Y, Nesseler N, Mallédant Y, Seguin P | title = Clinical review: fever in septic ICU patients--friend or foe? | journal = Critical Care | volume = 15 | issue = 3 | pages = 222 | date = 2011 | pmid = 21672276 | pmc = 3218963 | doi = 10.1186/cc10097 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
<ref name=Launey2011>{{cite journal | vauthors = Launey Y, Nesseler N, Mallédant Y, Seguin P | title = Clinical review: fever in septic ICU patients--friend or foe? | journal = Critical Care | volume = 15 | issue = 3 | page = 222 | date = 2011 | pmid = 21672276 | pmc = 3218963 | doi = 10.1186/cc10097 | doi-access = free }}</ref>


<ref name="Szakmany2012">{{cite journal | vauthors = Szakmany T, Hauser B, Radermacher P | title = N-acetylcysteine for sepsis and systemic inflammatory response in adults | journal = The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews | volume = 9 | issue = 9 | pages = CD006616 | date = September 2012 | pmid = 22972094 | pmc = 6517277 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD006616.pub2 }}</ref>
<ref name="Szakmany2012">{{cite journal | vauthors = Szakmany T, Hauser B, Radermacher P | title = N-acetylcysteine for sepsis and systemic inflammatory response in adults | journal = The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews | volume = 9 | issue = 9 | article-number = CD006616 | date = September 2012 | pmid = 22972094 | pmc = 6517277 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD006616.pub2 }}</ref>


<ref name=APC2012>{{cite journal | vauthors = Martí-Carvajal AJ, Solà I, Gluud C, Lathyris D, Cardona AF | title = Human recombinant protein C for severe sepsis and septic shock in adult and paediatric patients | journal = The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews | volume = 2018 | pages = CD004388 | date = December 2012 | issue = 12 | pmid = 23235609 | pmc = 6464614 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD004388.pub6 }}</ref>
<ref name=APC2012>{{cite journal | vauthors = Martí-Carvajal AJ, Solà I, Gluud C, Lathyris D, Cardona AF | title = Human recombinant protein C for severe sepsis and septic shock in adult and paediatric patients | journal = The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews | volume = 2018 | article-number = CD004388 | date = December 2012 | issue = 12 | pmid = 23235609 | pmc = 6464614 | doi = 10.1002/14651858.CD004388.pub6 }}</ref>


<ref name=Fink2014>{{cite journal | vauthors = Fink MP, Warren HS | title = Strategies to improve drug development for sepsis | journal = Nature Reviews. Drug Discovery | volume = 13 | issue = 10 | pages = 741–758 | date = October 2014 | pmid = 25190187 | doi = 10.1038/nrd4368 | s2cid = 20904332 }}</ref>
<ref name=Fink2014>{{cite journal | vauthors = Fink MP, Warren HS | title = Strategies to improve drug development for sepsis | journal = Nature Reviews. Drug Discovery | volume = 13 | issue = 10 | pages = 741–758 | date = October 2014 | pmid = 25190187 | doi = 10.1038/nrd4368 | s2cid = 20904332 }}</ref>
Line 429: Line 430:
<ref name=Hirasawa2009>{{cite journal | vauthors = Hirasawa H, Oda S, Nakamura M | title = Blood glucose control in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock | journal = World Journal of Gastroenterology | volume = 15 | issue = 33 | pages = 4132–4136 | date = September 2009 | pmid = 19725146 | pmc = 2738808 | doi = 10.3748/wjg.15.4132 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
<ref name=Hirasawa2009>{{cite journal | vauthors = Hirasawa H, Oda S, Nakamura M | title = Blood glucose control in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock | journal = World Journal of Gastroenterology | volume = 15 | issue = 33 | pages = 4132–4136 | date = September 2009 | pmid = 19725146 | pmc = 2738808 | doi = 10.3748/wjg.15.4132 | doi-access = free }}</ref>


<ref name="pmid32430052">{{cite journal | vauthors = Bauer M, Gerlach H, Vogelmann T, Preissing F, Stiefel J, Adam D | title = Mortality in sepsis and septic shock in Europe, North America and Australia between 2009 and 2019- results from a systematic review and meta-analysis | journal = Critical Care | volume = 24 | issue = 1 | pages = 239 | date = May 2020 | pmid = 32430052 | pmc = 7236499 | doi = 10.1186/s13054-020-02950-2 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
<ref name="pmid32430052">{{cite journal | vauthors = Bauer M, Gerlach H, Vogelmann T, Preissing F, Stiefel J, Adam D | title = Mortality in sepsis and septic shock in Europe, North America and Australia between 2009 and 2019- results from a systematic review and meta-analysis | journal = Critical Care | volume = 24 | issue = 1 | article-number = 239 | date = May 2020 | pmid = 32430052 | pmc = 7236499 | doi = 10.1186/s13054-020-02950-2 | doi-access = free }}</ref>


<ref name=Carpenter2009>{{cite journal | vauthors = Carpenter CR, Keim SM, Upadhye S, Nguyen HB | title = Risk stratification of the potentially septic patient in the emergency department: the Mortality in the Emergency Department Sepsis (MEDS) score | journal = The Journal of Emergency Medicine | volume = 37 | issue = 3 | pages = 319–327 | date = October 2009 | pmid = 19427752 | doi = 10.1016/j.jemermed.2009.03.016 }}</ref>
<ref name=Carpenter2009>{{cite journal | vauthors = Carpenter CR, Keim SM, Upadhye S, Nguyen HB | title = Risk stratification of the potentially septic patient in the emergency department: the Mortality in the Emergency Department Sepsis (MEDS) score | journal = The Journal of Emergency Medicine | volume = 37 | issue = 3 | pages = 319–327 | date = October 2009 | pmid = 19427752 | doi = 10.1016/j.jemermed.2009.03.016 }}</ref>
Line 437: Line 438:
<ref name="Lyle2014">{{cite journal | vauthors = Lyle NH, Pena OM, Boyd JH, Hancock RE | title = Barriers to the effective treatment of sepsis: antimicrobial agents, sepsis definitions, and host-directed therapies | journal = Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences | volume = 1323 | issue = 2014 | pages = 101–114 | date = September 2014 | pmid = 24797961 | doi = 10.1111/nyas.12444 | s2cid = 5089865 | bibcode = 2014NYASA1323..101L }}</ref>
<ref name="Lyle2014">{{cite journal | vauthors = Lyle NH, Pena OM, Boyd JH, Hancock RE | title = Barriers to the effective treatment of sepsis: antimicrobial agents, sepsis definitions, and host-directed therapies | journal = Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences | volume = 1323 | issue = 2014 | pages = 101–114 | date = September 2014 | pmid = 24797961 | doi = 10.1111/nyas.12444 | s2cid = 5089865 | bibcode = 2014NYASA1323..101L }}</ref>


<ref name=Munford2011>{{cite book | veditors = Longo DL, Fauci AS, Kasper DL, Hauser SL, Jameson JL, Loscalzo J | vauthors = Munford RS |title= Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine |year= 2011 |publisher= [[McGraw-Hill Education|McGraw-Hill]] |location= New York |isbn= 9780071748896 |edition= 18th |chapter= Ch. 271: Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock |pages= 2223–31}}</ref>
<ref name=Munford2011>{{cite book | veditors = Longo DL, Fauci AS, Kasper DL, Hauser SL, Jameson JL, Loscalzo J | vauthors = Munford RS |title= Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine |year= 2011 |publisher= [[McGraw-Hill Education|McGraw-Hill]] |location= New York |isbn= 978-0-07-174889-6 |edition= 18th |chapter= Ch. 271: Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock |pages= 2223–31}}</ref>


<ref name="hcup-us.ahrq.gov">{{cite book | title = Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project |chapter= Trends in Septicemia Hospitalizations and Readmissions in Selected HCUP States, 2005 and 2010 |series = Statistical Brief #161 | date = September 2013 | pmid = 24228290 | chapter-url = https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK169246/ | vauthors = Sutton JP, Friedman B |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170906203715/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK169246/ |archive-date= 6 September 2017 |publisher= [[United States National Library of Medicine]]|title-link= Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project }}</ref>
<ref name="hcup-us.ahrq.gov">{{cite book | title = Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project |chapter= Trends in Septicemia Hospitalizations and Readmissions in Selected HCUP States, 2005 and 2010 |series = Statistical Brief #161 | date = September 2013 | pmid = 24228290 | chapter-url = https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK169246/ | vauthors = Sutton JP, Friedman B |url-status=live |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170906203715/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK169246/ |archive-date= 6 September 2017 |publisher= [[United States National Library of Medicine]]|title-link= Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project }}</ref>
Line 449: Line 450:
<ref name="Rubin2014">{{cite journal | vauthors = Rubin LG, Schaffner W | title = Clinical practice. Care of the asplenic patient | journal = The New England Journal of Medicine | volume = 371 | issue = 4 | pages = 349–356 | date = July 2014 | pmid = 25054718 | doi = 10.1056/NEJMcp1314291 }}</ref>
<ref name="Rubin2014">{{cite journal | vauthors = Rubin LG, Schaffner W | title = Clinical practice. Care of the asplenic patient | journal = The New England Journal of Medicine | volume = 371 | issue = 4 | pages = 349–356 | date = July 2014 | pmid = 25054718 | doi = 10.1056/NEJMcp1314291 }}</ref>


<ref name=Geroulanos2006>{{cite journal | vauthors = Geroulanos S, Douka ET | title = Historical perspective of the word "sepsis" | journal = Intensive Care Medicine | volume = 32 | issue = 12 | pages = 2077 | date = December 2006 | pmid = 17131165 | doi = 10.1007/s00134-006-0392-2 | s2cid = 37084190 }}</ref>
<ref name=Geroulanos2006>{{cite journal | vauthors = Geroulanos S, Douka ET | title = Historical perspective of the word "sepsis" | journal = Intensive Care Medicine | volume = 32 | issue = 12 | page = 2077 | date = December 2006 | pmid = 17131165 | doi = 10.1007/s00134-006-0392-2 | s2cid = 37084190 }}</ref>


<ref name="CavaillonAdrie2008">{{cite book | veditors = Cavaillon JM, Christophe A  |title= Sepsis and Non-infectious Systemic Inflammation: From Biology to Critical Care |year= 2008 |publisher= [[John Wiley & Sons]] |isbn= 9783527319350 |page= 3 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wZDWjuFGsIcC&pg=PA3 | vauthors = Vincent JL |chapter= Ch. 1: Definition of Sepsis and Non-infectious SIRS}}</ref>
<ref name="CavaillonAdrie2008">{{cite book | veditors = Cavaillon JM, Christophe A  |title= Sepsis and Non-infectious Systemic Inflammation: From Biology to Critical Care |year= 2008 |publisher= [[John Wiley & Sons]] |isbn= 978-3-527-31935-0 |page= 3 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wZDWjuFGsIcC&pg=PA3 | vauthors = Vincent JL |chapter= Ch. 1: Definition of Sepsis and Non-infectious SIRS}}</ref>


<ref name="pmid18171697">{{cite journal | vauthors = Marshall JC | title = Sepsis: rethinking the approach to clinical research | journal = Journal of Leukocyte Biology | volume = 83 | issue = 3 | pages = 471–482 | date = March 2008 | pmid = 18171697 | doi = 10.1189/jlb.0607380 | df = dmy-all | s2cid = 24332955 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.492.7774 }}</ref>
<ref name="pmid18171697">{{cite journal | vauthors = Marshall JC | title = Sepsis: rethinking the approach to clinical research | journal = Journal of Leukocyte Biology | volume = 83 | issue = 3 | pages = 471–482 | date = March 2008 | pmid = 18171697 | doi = 10.1189/jlb.0607380 | s2cid = 24332955 | citeseerx = 10.1.1.492.7774 }}</ref>


<ref name=Merck>{{cite web|title=Bacteremia|url=http://www.merckmanuals.com/home/infections/bacteremia-sepsis-and-septic-shock/bacteremia/|work= [[The Merck Manuals|The Merck Manual—Home Health Handbook]] |access-date=25 November 2017|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170728011557/http://www.merckmanuals.com/home/infections/bacteremia-sepsis-and-septic-shock/bacteremia/|archive-date=28 July 2017|publisher=[[Merck & Co.]]}}</ref>
<ref name=Merck>{{cite web|title=Bacteremia|url=http://www.merckmanuals.com/home/infections/bacteremia-sepsis-and-septic-shock/bacteremia/|work= [[The Merck Manuals|The Merck Manual—Home Health Handbook]] |access-date=25 November 2017|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170728011557/http://www.merckmanuals.com/home/infections/bacteremia-sepsis-and-septic-shock/bacteremia/|archive-date=28 July 2017|publisher=[[Merck & Co.]]}}</ref>
Line 477: Line 478:
<ref name="pmid23401516">{{cite journal | vauthors = Seok J, Warren HS, Cuenca AG, Mindrinos MN, Baker HV, Xu W, Richards DR, McDonald-Smith GP, Gao H, Hennessy L, Finnerty CC, López CM, Honari S, Moore EE, Minei JP, Cuschieri J, Bankey PE, Johnson JL, Sperry J, Nathens AB, Billiar TR, West MA, Jeschke MG, Klein MB, Gamelli RL, Gibran NS, Brownstein BH, Miller-Graziano C, Calvano SE, Mason PH, Cobb JP, Rahme LG, Lowry SF, Maier RV, Moldawer LL, Herndon DN, Davis RW, Xiao W, Tompkins RG | display-authors = 6 | title = Genomic responses in mouse models poorly mimic human inflammatory diseases | journal = Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | volume = 110 | issue = 9 | pages = 3507–3512 | date = February 2013 | pmid = 23401516 | pmc = 3587220 | doi = 10.1073/pnas.1222878110 | doi-access = free | bibcode = 2013PNAS..110.3507S }}</ref>
<ref name="pmid23401516">{{cite journal | vauthors = Seok J, Warren HS, Cuenca AG, Mindrinos MN, Baker HV, Xu W, Richards DR, McDonald-Smith GP, Gao H, Hennessy L, Finnerty CC, López CM, Honari S, Moore EE, Minei JP, Cuschieri J, Bankey PE, Johnson JL, Sperry J, Nathens AB, Billiar TR, West MA, Jeschke MG, Klein MB, Gamelli RL, Gibran NS, Brownstein BH, Miller-Graziano C, Calvano SE, Mason PH, Cobb JP, Rahme LG, Lowry SF, Maier RV, Moldawer LL, Herndon DN, Davis RW, Xiao W, Tompkins RG | display-authors = 6 | title = Genomic responses in mouse models poorly mimic human inflammatory diseases | journal = Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | volume = 110 | issue = 9 | pages = 3507–3512 | date = February 2013 | pmid = 23401516 | pmc = 3587220 | doi = 10.1073/pnas.1222878110 | doi-access = free | bibcode = 2013PNAS..110.3507S }}</ref>


<ref name=Haseldine2016>{{cite journal | vauthors = Hazeldine J, Hampson P, Lord JM | title = The diagnostic and prognostic value of systems biology research in major traumatic and thermal injury: a review | journal = Burns & Trauma | volume = 4 | pages = 33 | date = 2016 | pmid = 27672669 | pmc = 5030723 | doi = 10.1186/s41038-016-0059-3 | doi-access = free }}</ref>
<ref name=Haseldine2016>{{cite journal | vauthors = Hazeldine J, Hampson P, Lord JM | title = The diagnostic and prognostic value of systems biology research in major traumatic and thermal injury: a review | journal = Burns & Trauma | volume = 4 | page = 33 | date = 2016 | article-number = s41038-016-0059-3 | pmid = 27672669 | pmc = 5030723 | doi = 10.1186/s41038-016-0059-3 | doi-access = free }}</ref>


<ref name=Torio2006>{{cite book | title = Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project  | date = 1 January 2006 | pmid = 27359025 | chapter = National Inpatient Hospital Costs: The Most Expensive Conditions by Payer, 2013 |series= Statistical Brief #204 | publisher = [[Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality]], [[National Library of Medicine]] | chapter-url = https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK368492/ | url-status=live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20170906203715/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK368492/ | archive-date = 6 September 2017 | vauthors = Torio CM, Moore BJ | title-link = Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project }}</ref>
<ref name=Torio2006>{{cite book | title = Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project  | date = 1 January 2006 | pmid = 27359025 | chapter = National Inpatient Hospital Costs: The Most Expensive Conditions by Payer, 2013 |series= Statistical Brief #204 | publisher = [[Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality]], [[National Library of Medicine]] | chapter-url = https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK368492/ | url-status=live | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20170906203715/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK368492/ | archive-date = 6 September 2017 | vauthors = Torio CM, Moore BJ | title-link = Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project }}</ref>

Latest revision as of 13:52, 13 November 2025

Template:Short description Script error: No such module "For". Template:Pp-semi Template:Pp-move Template:Use dmy dates Template:Infobox medical condition (new)

Sepsis is a potentially life-threatening condition that arises when the body's dysregulated response to infection causes injury to its own tissues and organs.[1][2]

This initial stage of sepsis is followed by dysregulation of the immune system.[3] Common signs and symptoms include fever, increased heart rate, increased breathing rate, and confusion.[4] There may also be symptoms related to a specific infection, such as a cough with pneumonia, or painful urination with a kidney infection.[5] The very young, old, and people with a weakened immune system may not have any symptoms specific to their infection, and their body temperature may be low or normal instead of constituting a fever.[5] Severe sepsis may cause organ dysfunction and significantly reduced blood flow.[6] The presence of low blood pressure, high blood lactate, or low urine output may suggest poor blood flow.[6] Septic shock is low blood pressure due to sepsis that does not improve after fluid replacement or requires medications to raise the blood pressure.[6][7]

Sepsis is caused by many organisms including bacteria, viruses, and fungi.[8] Gram negative and gram positive bacteria are the most common causes of sepsis. Viral pathogens and diarrheal illnesses are common causes in children.[7] In 60–70% of cases an infectious pathogen is found.[7] Common locations for the primary infection include the lungs, brain, urinary tract, skin, and abdominal organs.[5] Risk factors include being very young or old, a weakened immune system from conditions such as cancer or diabetes, major trauma, and burns.[4] A shortened sequential organ failure assessment score (SOFA score), known as the quick SOFA score (qSOFA), has replaced the SIRS system of diagnosis.[1] qSOFA criteria for sepsis include at least two of the following three: increased breathing rate, change in the level of consciousness, and low blood pressure.[1] Sepsis guidelines recommend obtaining blood cultures before starting antibiotics; however, the diagnosis does not require the blood to be infected.[5] Medical imaging is helpful when looking for the possible location of the infection.[6] Other potential causes of similar signs and symptoms include anaphylaxis, adrenal insufficiency, low blood volume, heart failure, and pulmonary embolism.[5]

Sepsis requires immediate treatment with intravenous fluids and antimicrobial medications.[4][9] Ongoing care and stabilization often continues in an intensive care unit.[4] If an adequate trial of fluid replacement is not enough to maintain blood pressure, then the use of medications that raise blood pressure becomes necessary.[4] Mechanical ventilation and dialysis may be needed to support the function of the lungs and kidneys, respectively.[4] A central venous catheter and arterial line may be placed for access to the bloodstream and to guide treatment.[6] Other helpful measurements include cardiac output and superior vena cava oxygen saturation.[6] People with sepsis need preventive measures for deep vein thrombosis, stress ulcers, and pressure ulcers unless other conditions prevent such interventions.[6] Some people might benefit from tight control of blood sugar levels with insulin.[6] The use of corticosteroids is controversial, with some reviews finding benefit,[10][11] others not.[12]

A person's age, immune system function, the virulence of the pathogen causing infection, the amount of microorganisms in the body causing infection (pathogen burden) all affect the incidence, severity and prognosis of sepsis.[7][13] The risk of death from sepsis is as high as 30%, while for severe sepsis it is as high as 50%, and the risk of death from septic shock is 80%.[14][15][13] Sepsis affected about 49 million people in 2017, with 11 million deaths (1 in 5 deaths worldwide).[16] In the developed world, approximately 0.2 to 3 people per 1000 are affected by sepsis yearly.[13][17] Rates of disease have been increasing.[6] 85% of cases occurred in low or middle income countries with 40% of cases worldwide occurring in Sub-Saharan Africa.[7] Some data indicate that sepsis is more common among men than women;[5] however, other data show a greater prevalence of the disease among women.[16]

File:En.Wikipedia-VideoWiki-Sepsis.webm
Video summary (script)

Signs and symptoms

In addition to symptoms related to the actual cause, people with sepsis may have a fever, low body temperature, rapid breathing, a fast heart rate, confusion, and edema.[18] Early signs include a rapid heart rate, decreased urination, and high blood sugar. Signs of established sepsis include confusion, metabolic acidosis (which may be accompanied by a faster breathing rate that leads to respiratory alkalosis), low blood pressure due to decreased systemic vascular resistance, higher cardiac output, and disorders in blood-clotting that may lead to organ failure.[19] Fever is the most common presenting symptom in sepsis, but fever may be absent in some people, such as the elderly or those who are immunocompromised.[20]

The drop in blood pressure seen in sepsis can cause lightheadedness and is part of the criteria for septic shock.[21]

Oxidative stress is observed in septic shock, with circulating levels of copper and vitamin C being decreased.[22]

Diastolic blood pressure falls during the early stages of sepsis, causing a widening/increasing of pulse pressure, which is the difference between the systolic and diastolic blood pressures. If sepsis becomes severe and hemodynamic compromise advances, the systolic pressure also decreases, causing a narrowing/decreasing of pulse pressure.[23] A pulse pressure of over 70 mmHg in patients with sepsis is correlated with an increased chance of survival.[24] A widened pulse pressure is also correlated with an increased chance that someone with sepsis will benefit from and respond to IV fluids.[24]

Cause

File:Patient lying in bed in intensive care unit of hospital with apparatuses and hemodialysis machine.jpg
Patient of an intensive care unit of a German hospital (2015) with severe sepsis caused by a chain reaction of incidental negative events after a prior surgery of the abdomen. After an emergency surgery, he received antibiotics, parenteral nutrition, and pain killers via automated injection employing infusion pumps (background right). Hemodialysis via the machine on the left became necessary due to kidney malfunction and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. After three months in the hospital, the patient recovered within a month and has since then fully recovered (as of 2023).

Infections leading to sepsis are usually bacterial but may be fungal, parasitic, or viral.[25] Gram-positive bacteria were the primary cause of sepsis before the introduction of antibiotics in the 1950s. After the introduction of antibiotics, gram-negative bacteria became the predominant cause of sepsis from the 1960s to the 1980s.[26] After the 1980s, gram-positive bacteria, most commonly staphylococci, are thought to cause more than 50% of cases of sepsis.[17][27] Other commonly implicated bacteria include Streptococcus pyogenes, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Klebsiella species.[28] Fungal sepsis accounts for approximately 5% of severe sepsis and septic shock cases; the most common cause of fungal sepsis is an infection by Candida species of yeast,[29] a frequent hospital-acquired infection. The most common causes for parasitic sepsis are Plasmodium (which leads to malaria), Schistosoma and Echinococcus.

The most common sites of infection resulting in severe sepsis are the lungs, the abdomen, and the urinary tract.[25] 40–60% of infections causing sepsis originate in the lungs, 15–30% are abdominal infections, and 15–30% are bladder, kidney, skin or soft tissue infections.[7] But the site of infection, as well as the causative infectious pathogen vary depending on geographic location and region.[7]

Pathophysiology

Sepsis is caused by a combination of factors related to the particular invading pathogen(s) and the status of the immune system of the host.[30] The early phase of sepsis, characterized by excessive inflammation (sometimes resulting in a cytokine storm), may be followed by a prolonged period of decreased functioning of the immune system.[31][3] Either of these phases may prove fatal. On the other hand, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) occurs in people without the presence of infection, for example, in those with burns, polytrauma, or the initial state in pancreatitis and chemical pneumonitis. However, sepsis also causes a similar response to SIRS.[32]

Platelets have a potentially key role in immune modulation during sepsis.[33] Systemic inflammation, endothelial injury, and dysregulated coagulation activate platelets in the early phases of the condition.[33] These activated platelets interact with leukocytes and endothelial cells, amplifying both inflammatory and thrombotic responses.[33] This interaction contributes to microvascular thrombosis and progression to multiple organ dysfunction syndrome.[33]

Microbial factors

Bacterial virulence factors, such as glycocalyx and various adhesins, allow colonization, immune evasion, and establishment of disease in the host.[30] Sepsis caused by gram-negative bacteria is thought to be largely due to a response by the host to the lipid A component of lipopolysaccharide, also called endotoxin.[34][35] Sepsis caused by gram-positive bacteria may result from an immunological response to cell wall lipoteichoic acid.[36] Bacterial exotoxins that act as superantigens also may cause sepsis.[30] Superantigens simultaneously bind major histocompatibility complex and T-cell receptors in the absence of antigen presentation. This forced receptor interaction induces the production of pro-inflammatory chemical signals (cytokines) by T-cells.[30]

There are several microbial factors that may cause the typical septic inflammatory cascade. An invading pathogen is recognized by its pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs). Examples of PAMPs include lipopolysaccharides and flagellin in gram-negative bacteria, muramyl dipeptide in the peptidoglycan of the gram-positive bacterial cell wall, and CpG bacterial DNA. These PAMPs are recognized by the pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) of the innate immune system, which may be membrane-bound or cytosolic.[37] There are four families of PRRs: the toll-like receptors, the C-type lectin receptors, the NOD-like receptors, and the RIG-I-like receptors. Invariably, the association of a PAMP and a PRR will cause a series of intracellular signalling cascades. Consequently, transcription factors such as nuclear factor-kappa B and activator protein-1 will up-regulate the expression of pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines.[38]

Other immunological responses related to microbial infections, such as NETs, can also play a role or be observed in sepsis. NET formation only occurs via neutrophil cell death, which occurs during microbial infections. Neutrophil extracellular traps, called NETs, eliminate bacteria from the blood flow. These compounds are part of the innate immune system, which is activated initially during infections.[39]

Host factors

Upon detection of microbial antigens, the host systemic immune system is activated. Immune cells not only recognise pathogen-associated molecular patterns but also damage-associated molecular patterns from damaged tissues. An uncontrolled immune response is then activated because leukocytes are not recruited to the specific site of infection, but instead, they are recruited all over the body. Then, an immunosuppression state ensues when the proinflammatory T helper cell 1 (TH1) is shifted to TH2,[40] mediated by interleukin 10, which is known as "compensatory anti-inflammatory response syndrome".[26] The apoptosis (cell death) of lymphocytes further worsens the immunosuppression. Neutrophils, monocytes, macrophages, dendritic cells, CD4+ T cells, and B cells all undergo apoptosis, whereas regulatory T cells are more apoptosis-resistant.[3] Subsequently, multiple organ failure ensues because tissues are unable to use oxygen efficiently due to inhibition of cytochrome c oxidase, possibly as part of a "cell hibernation" mechanism, to conserve oxygen.[40]

Inflammatory responses cause multiple organ dysfunction syndrome through various mechanisms as described below. Increased permeability of the lung vessels causes leaking of fluids into alveoli, which results in pulmonary edema and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Impaired utilization of oxygen in the liver impairs bile salt transport, causing jaundice (yellowish discoloration of the skin). In kidneys, inadequate oxygenation results in tubular epithelial cell injury (of the cells lining the kidney tubules), and thus causes acute kidney injury (AKI). Meanwhile, in the heart, impaired calcium transport and low production of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) can cause myocardial depression, reducing cardiac contractility and causing heart failure. In the gastrointestinal tract, increased permeability of the mucosa alters the microflora, causing mucosal bleeding and paralytic ileus. In the central nervous system, direct damage of the brain cells and disturbances of neurotransmissions causes altered mental status.[41] Cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor, interleukin 1, and interleukin 6 may activate procoagulation factors in the cells lining blood vessels, leading to endothelial damage. The damaged endothelial surface inhibits anticoagulant properties as well as increases antifibrinolysis, which may lead to intravascular clotting, the formation of blood clots in small blood vessels, and multiple organ failure.[42]

The low blood pressure seen in those with sepsis is the result of various processes, including excessive production of chemicals that dilate blood vessels such as nitric oxide, a deficiency of chemicals that constrict blood vessels such as vasopressin, and activation of ATP-sensitive potassium channels.[43] In those with severe sepsis and septic shock, this sequence of events leads to a type of circulatory shock known as distributive shock.[44]

Diagnosis

Early diagnosis is necessary to properly manage sepsis, as the initiation of rapid therapy is key to reducing deaths from severe sepsis.[6] Some hospitals use alerts generated from electronic health records to bring attention to potential cases as early as possible.[45]

File:Bloodculturetubes.JPG
Blood culture bottles: orange cap for anaerobes, green cap for aerobes, and yellow cap for blood samples from children[46]

Within the first three hours of suspected sepsis, diagnostic studies should include white blood cell counts, measuring serum lactate, and obtaining appropriate cultures before starting antibiotics, so long as this does not delay their use by more than 45 minutes.[6] To identify the causative organism(s), at least two sets of blood cultures using bottles with media for aerobic and anaerobic organisms are necessary. At least one should be drawn through the skin and one through each vascular access device (such as an IV catheter) that has been in place for more than 48 hours.[6] Bacteria are present in the blood in only about 30% of cases.[47] Another possible method of detection is by polymerase chain reaction. If other sources of infection are suspected, cultures of these sources, such as urine, cerebrospinal fluid, wounds, or respiratory secretions, also should be obtained, as long as this does not delay the use of antibiotics.[6]

Within six hours, if blood pressure remains low despite initial fluid resuscitation of 30 mL/kg, or if initial lactate is ≥ four mmol/L (36 mg/dL), central venous pressure and central venous oxygen saturation should be measured.[6] Lactate should be re-measured if the initial lactate was elevated.[6] Evidence for point of care lactate measurement over usual methods of measurement, however, is poor.[48]

Within twelve hours, it is essential to diagnose or exclude any source of infection that would require emergent source control, such as a necrotizing soft tissue infection, an infection causing inflammation of the abdominal cavity lining, an infection of the bile duct, or an intestinal infarction.[6] A pierced internal organ (free air on an abdominal X-ray or CT scan), an abnormal chest X-ray consistent with pneumonia (with focal opacification), or petechiae, purpura, or purpura fulminans may indicate the presence of an infection.Script error: No such module "Unsubst".

Definitions

Template:SIRS

File:Sepsis Steps.png
Sepsis Steps. Training tool for teaching the progression of sepsis stages

Previously, SIRS criteria had been used to define sepsis. If the SIRS criteria are negative, it is very unlikely the person has sepsis; if it is positive, there is just a moderate probability that the person has sepsis. According to SIRS, there were different levels of sepsis: sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock.[32] The definition of SIRS is shown below:

In 2016, a new consensus was reached to replace screening by systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) with the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA score) and the abbreviated version (qSOFA).[1] The three criteria for the qSOFA score include a respiratory rate greater than or equal to 22 breaths per minute, systolic blood pressure 100 mmHg or less, and altered mental status.[1] Sepsis is suspected when 2 of the qSOFA criteria are met.[1] The SOFA score was intended to be used in the intensive care unit (ICU) where it is administered upon admission to the ICU and then repeated every 48 hours, whereas the qSOFA could be used outside the ICU.[20] Some advantages of the qSOFA score are that it can be administered quickly and does not require labs.[20] However, the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) raised concerns that qSOFA and SOFA criteria may lead to delayed diagnosis of serious infection, leading to delayed treatment.[50] Although SIRS criteria can be too sensitive and not specific enough in identifying sepsis, SOFA also has its limitations and is not intended to replace the SIRS definition.[51] qSOFA has also been found to be poorly sensitive though decently specific for the risk of death with SIRS possibly better for screening. NOTE - Surviving Sepsis Campaign 2021 Guidelines recommend "against using qSOFA compared with SIRS, NEWS, or MEWS as a single screening tool for sepsis or septic shock".[52]

End-organ dysfunction

Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote". Examples of end-organ dysfunction include the following:[53]

More specific definitions of end-organ dysfunction exist for SIRS in pediatrics.[54]

Consensus definitions, however, continue to evolve, with the latest expanding the list of signs and symptoms of sepsis to reflect clinical bedside experience.[18]

Biomarkers

Biomarkers can help with diagnosis because they can point to the presence or severity of sepsis, although their exact role in the management of sepsis remains undefined.[55] A 2013 review concluded moderate-quality evidence exists to support the use of the procalcitonin level as a method to distinguish sepsis from non-infectious causes of SIRS.[47] The same review found the sensitivity of the test to be 77% and the specificity to be 79%. The authors suggested that procalcitonin may serve as a helpful diagnostic marker for sepsis, but cautioned that its level alone does not definitively make the diagnosis.[47] More current literature recommends utilizing the PCT to direct antibiotic therapy for improved antibiotic stewardship and better patient outcomes.[56]

A 2012 systematic review found that soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor (SuPAR) is a nonspecific marker of inflammation and does not accurately diagnose sepsis.[57] This same review concluded, however, that SuPAR has prognostic value, as higher SuPAR levels are associated with an increased rate of death in those with sepsis.[57] Serial measurement of lactate levels (approximately every 4 to 6 hours) may guide treatment and is associated with lower mortality in sepsis.[20]

Differential diagnosis

The differential diagnosis for sepsis is broad and has to examine (to exclude) the non-infectious conditions that may cause the systemic signs of SIRS: alcohol withdrawal, acute pancreatitis, burns, pulmonary embolism, thyrotoxicosis, anaphylaxis, adrenal insufficiency, and neurogenic shock.[19][58] Hyperinflammatory syndromes such as hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis (HLH) may have similar symptoms and are on the differential diagnosis.[59]

Neonatal sepsis

In common clinical usage, neonatal sepsis refers to a bacterial blood stream infection in the first month of life, such as meningitis, pneumonia, pyelonephritis, or gastroenteritis,[60] but neonatal sepsis also may be due to infection with fungi, viruses, or parasites.[60] Criteria with regard to hemodynamic compromise or respiratory failure are not useful because they present too late for intervention.[61]

Treatment

File:Sepsis treatment.jpg
Intravenous fluids being given

Script error: No such module "Labelled list hatnote".

Sepsis requires immediate treatment in a hospital as it can quickly worsen. Current professional recommendations include several actions ("bundles") to be followed as soon as possible after diagnosis. Within the first three hours, someone with sepsis should have received antibiotics and intravenous fluids if there is evidence of either low blood pressure or other evidence for inadequate blood supply to organs (as evidenced by a raised level of lactate); blood cultures should also be obtained within this period. After six hours, the blood pressure should be adequate, close monitoring of blood pressure and blood supply to organs should be in place, and the lactate should be measured again if initially it was raised.[6] A related bundle, the "Sepsis Six", is in widespread use in the United Kingdom; this requires the administration of antibiotics within an hour of recognition, blood cultures, lactate, and hemoglobin determination, urine output monitoring, high-flow oxygen, and intravenous fluids.[62][63]

Apart from the timely administration of fluids and antibiotics, the management of sepsis also involves surgical drainage of infected fluid collections and appropriate support for organ dysfunction. This may include hemodialysis in kidney failure, mechanical ventilation in lung dysfunction, transfusion of blood products, and drug and fluid therapy for circulatory failure. Ensuring adequate nutrition—preferably by enteral feeding, but if necessary, by parenteral nutrition—is important during prolonged illness.[6] Medication to prevent deep vein thrombosis and gastric ulcers also may be used.[6]

Antibiotics

Two sets of blood cultures (aerobic and anaerobic) are recommended without delaying the initiation of antibiotics. Cultures from other sites such as respiratory secretions, urine, wounds, cerebrospinal fluid, and catheter insertion sites are recommended if infections from these sites are suspected.[9] In severe sepsis and septic shock, broad-spectrum antibiotics (usually two, a β-lactam antibiotic with broad coverage, or broad-spectrum carbapenem combined with fluoroquinolones, macrolides, or aminoglycosides) are recommended. The choice of antibiotics is important in determining the survival of the person.[44][9] Some recommend they be given within one hour of making the diagnosis, stating that for every hour of delay in the administration of antibiotics, there is an associated 6% rise in mortality.[49][44] Others did not find a benefit with early administration.[64]

Several factors determine the most appropriate choice for the initial antibiotic regimen. These factors include local patterns of bacterial sensitivity to antibiotics, whether the infection is thought to be a hospital or community-acquired infection, and which organ systems are thought to be infected.[44][20] Antibiotic regimens should be reassessed daily and narrowed if appropriate. Treatment duration is typically 7–10 days with the type of antibiotic used directed by the results of cultures. If the culture result is negative, antibiotics should be de-escalated according to the person's clinical response or stopped altogether if an infection is not present to decrease the chances that the person is infected with multiple drug resistance organisms. In case of people having a high risk of being infected with multiple drug resistant organisms such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii, the addition of an antibiotic specific to the organism is recommended. For methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin or teicoplanin is recommended. For Legionella infection, addition of macrolide or fluoroquinolone is chosen. If fungal infection is suspected, an echinocandin, such as caspofungin or micafungin, is chosen for people with severe sepsis, followed by triazole (fluconazole and itraconazole) for less ill people.[9] Prolonged antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended in people who have SIRS without any infectious origin, such as acute pancreatitis and burns unless sepsis is suspected.[9]

Once-daily dosing of aminoglycoside is sufficient to achieve peak plasma concentration for a clinical response without kidney toxicity. Meanwhile, for antibiotics with low volume distribution (vancomycin, teicoplanin, colistin), a loading dose is required to achieve an adequate therapeutic level to fight infections. Frequent infusions of beta-lactam antibiotics without exceeding the total daily dose would help to keep the antibiotic level above minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), thus providing a better clinical response.[9] Giving beta-lactam antibiotics continuously may be better than giving them intermittently.[65] Access to therapeutic drug monitoring is important to ensure adequate drug therapeutic level while at the same time preventing the drug from reaching a toxic level.[9]

Intravenous fluids

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign has recommended 30 mL/kg of fluid to be given in adults in the first three hours followed by fluid titration according to blood pressure, urine output, respiratory rate, and oxygen saturation with a target mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 65 mmHg.[9] In children, an initial amount of 20 mL/kg is reasonable in shock.[66] In cases of severe sepsis and septic shock where a central venous catheter is used to measure blood pressures dynamically, fluids should be administered until the central venous pressure reaches 8–12 mmHg.[43] Once these goals are met, the central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2), i.e., the oxygen saturation of venous blood as it returns to the heart as measured at the vena cava, is optimized.[9] If the ScvO2 is less than 70%, blood may be given to reach a hemoglobin of 10 g/dL and then inotropes are added until the ScvO2 is optimized.[30] In those with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and sufficient tissue blood fluid, more fluids should be given carefully.[6]

Crystalloid solution is recommended as the fluid of choice for resuscitation.[9] "Balanced" crystalloid solutions such as lactated ringers (which have levels of sodium, potassium and chloride closer to a person's extracellular levels) are associated with a lower mortality as compared to normal saline solutions in the treatment of sepsis.[7] Albumin can be used if a large amount of crystalloid is required for resuscitation.[9] Crystalloid solutions shows little difference with hydroxyethyl starch in terms of risk of death.[67] Starches also carry an increased risk of acute kidney injury,[67][68] and need for blood transfusion.[69][70] Various colloid solutions (such as modified gelatin) carry no advantage over crystalloid.[67] Albumin also appears to be of no benefit over crystalloids.[71]

Blood products

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommended packed red blood cells transfusion for hemoglobin levels below 70 g/L if there is no myocardial ischemia, hypoxemia, or acute bleeding.[9] In a 2014 trial, blood transfusions to keep target hemoglobin above 70 or 90 g/L did not make any difference to survival rates; meanwhile, those with a lower threshold of transfusion received fewer transfusions in total.[72] Erythropoietin is not recommended in the treatment of anemia with septic shock because it may precipitate blood clotting events. Fresh frozen plasma transfusion usually does not correct the underlying clotting abnormalities before a planned surgical procedure. However, platelet transfusion is suggested for platelet counts below (10 billion/L) without any risk of bleeding, or (20 billion/L) with a high risk of bleeding, or (50 billion/L) with active bleeding, before planned surgery or an invasive procedure.[9] IV immunoglobulin is not recommended because its beneficial effects are uncertain.[9] Monoclonal and polyclonal preparations of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) do not lower the rate of death in newborns and adults with sepsis.[73] Evidence for the use of IgM-enriched polyclonal preparations of IVIG is inconsistent.[73] On the other hand, the use of antithrombin to treat disseminated intravascular coagulation is also not useful. Meanwhile, the blood purification technique (such as hemoperfusion, plasma filtration, and coupled plasma filtration adsorption) to remove inflammatory mediators and bacterial toxins from the blood also does not demonstrate any survival benefit for septic shock.[9]

Vasopressors

If the person has been sufficiently fluid resuscitated but the mean arterial pressure is not greater than 65 mmHg, vasopressors are recommended.[9] Norepinephrine (noradrenaline) is recommended as the initial choice.[9] Delaying initiation of vasopressor therapy during septic shock is associated with increased mortality.[74]

Norepinephrine is often used as a first-line treatment for hypotensive septic shock because evidence shows that there is a relative deficiency of vasopressin when shock continues for 24 to 48 hours.[75] Norepinephrine raises blood pressure through a vasoconstriction effect, with little effect on stroke volume and heart rate.[9] In some people, the required dose of vasopressor needed to increase the mean arterial pressure can become exceedingly high, and it becomes toxic.[76] To reduce the required dose of vasopressor, epinephrine may be added.[76] Epinephrine is not often used as a first-line treatment for hypotensive shock because it reduces blood flow to the abdominal organs and increases lactate levels.[75] Vasopressin can be used in septic shock because studies have shown that there is a relative deficiency of vasopressin when shock continues for 24 to 48 hours. However, vasopressin reduces blood flow to the heart, fingers/toes, and abdominal organs, resulting in a lack of oxygen supply to these tissues.[9] Dopamine is typically not recommended. Although dopamine is useful for increasing the stroke volume of the heart, it causes more abnormal heart rhythms than norepinephrine and also has an immunosuppressive effect. Dopamine is not proven to have protective properties on the kidneys.[9] Dobutamine can also be used in hypotensive septic shock to increase cardiac output and correct blood flow to the tissues.[77] Dobutamine is not used as often as epinephrine due to its associated side effects, which include reducing blood flow to the gut.[77] Additionally, dobutamine increases the cardiac output by abnormally increasing the heart rate.[77]

Steroids

The use of steroids in sepsis is controversial.[78] Studies do not give a clear picture as to whether and when glucocorticoids should be used.[79] The 2016 Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommends low-dose hydrocortisone only if both intravenous fluids and vasopressors are not able to adequately treat septic shock.[9] The 2021 Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommends IV corticosteroids for adults with septic shock who have an ongoing requirement for vasopressor therapy. A 2019 Cochrane (updated in 2025) review found moderate certainty evidence of benefit,[10] as did two 2019 reviews.[11][80]

During critical illness, a state of adrenal insufficiency and tissue resistance to corticosteroids may occur. This has been termed critical illness–related corticosteroid insufficiency.[81] Treatment with corticosteroids might be most beneficial in those with septic shock and early severe ARDS, whereas its role in others such as those with pancreatitis or severe pneumonia is unclear.[81] However, the exact way of determining corticosteroid insufficiency remains problematic. It should be suspected in those poorly responding to resuscitation with fluids and vasopressors. Neither ACTH stimulation testing[81] nor random cortisol levels are recommended to confirm the diagnosis.[9] The method of stopping glucocorticoid drugs is variable, and it is unclear whether they should be slowly decreased or simply abruptly stopped. However, the 2016 Surviving Sepsis Campaign recommended tapering steroids when vasopressors are no longer needed.[9]

Anesthesia

A target tidal volume of 6 mL/kg of predicted body weight (PBW) and a plateau pressure less than 30 cm H2O is recommended for those who require ventilation due to sepsis-induced severe ARDS. High positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) is recommended for moderate to severe ARDS in sepsis as it opens more lung units for oxygen exchange. Predicted body weight is calculated based on sex and height, and tools for this are available.[82] Recruitment maneuvers may be necessary for severe ARDS by briefly raising the transpulmonary pressure. It is recommended that the head of the bed be raised if possible to improve ventilation. However, β2 adrenergic receptor agonists are not recommended to treat ARDS because they may reduce survival rates and precipitate abnormal heart rhythms. A spontaneous breathing trial using continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), T piece, or inspiratory pressure augmentation can help reduce the duration of ventilation. Minimizing intermittent or continuous sedation helps reduce the duration of mechanical ventilation.[9]

General anesthesia is recommended for people with sepsis who require surgical procedures to remove the infectious source. Usually, inhalational and intravenous anesthetics are used. Requirements for anesthetics may be reduced in sepsis. Inhalational anesthetics can reduce the level of proinflammatory cytokines, altering leukocyte adhesion and proliferation, inducing apoptosis (cell death) of the lymphocytes, possibly with a toxic effect on mitochondrial function.[40] Although etomidate has a minimal effect on the cardiovascular system, it is often not recommended as a medication to help with intubation in this situation due to concerns it may lead to poor adrenal function and an increased risk of death.[83][84] The small amount of evidence there is, however, has not found a change in the risk of death with etomidate.[85]

Paralytic agents are not suggested for use in sepsis cases in the absence of ARDS, as a growing body of evidence points to reduced durations of mechanical ventilation, ICU, and hospital stays.[6] However, paralytic use in ARDS cases remains controversial. When appropriately used, paralytics may aid successful mechanical ventilation; however, evidence has also suggested that mechanical ventilation in severe sepsis does not improve oxygen consumption and delivery.[6]

Source control

Source control refers to physical interventions to control a focus of infection and reduce conditions favorable to microorganism growth or host defense impairment, such as drainage of pus from an abscess. It is one of the oldest procedures for the control of infections, giving rise to the Latin phrase Ubi pus, ibi evacua, and remains important despite the emergence of more modern treatments.[86][87]

Early goal-directed therapy

Early goal directed therapy (EGDT) is an approach to the management of severe sepsis during the initial 6 hours after diagnosis.[88] It is a step-wise approach, with the physiologic goal of optimizing cardiac preload, afterload, and contractility.[89] It includes giving early antibiotics.[89] EGDT also involves monitoring of hemodynamic parameters and specific interventions to achieve key resuscitation targets which include maintaining a central venous pressure between 8–12 mmHg, a mean arterial pressure of between 65 and 90 mmHg, a central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO2) greater than 70% and a urine output of greater than 0.5 mL/kg/hour. The goal is to optimize oxygen delivery to tissues and achieve a balance between systemic oxygen delivery and demand.[89] An appropriate decrease in serum lactate may be equivalent to ScvO2 and easier to obtain.[90]

In the original trial, early goal-directed therapy was found to reduce mortality from 46.5% to 30.5% in those with sepsis,[89] and the Surviving Sepsis Campaign has been recommending its use.[6] However, three more recent large randomized control trials (ProCESS, ARISE, and ProMISe), did not demonstrate a 90-day mortality benefit of early goal-directed therapy when compared to standard therapy in severe sepsis.[91] It is likely that some parts of EGDT are more important than others.[91] Following these trials, the use of EGDT is still considered reasonable.[92]

Newborns

Neonatal sepsis can be difficult to diagnose as newborns may be asymptomatic.[93] If a newborn shows signs and symptoms suggestive of sepsis, antibiotics are immediately started and are either changed to target a specific organism identified by diagnostic testing or discontinued after an infectious cause for the symptoms has been ruled out.[94] Despite early intervention, death occurs in 13% of children who develop septic shock, with the risk partly based on other health problems. For those without multiple organ system failures or who require only one inotropic agent, mortality is low.[95]

Other

Treating fever in sepsis, including people in septic shock, has not been associated with any improvement in mortality over a period of 28 days.[96] Treatment of fever still occurs for other reasons.[97][98]

A 2012 Cochrane review concluded that N-acetylcysteine does not reduce mortality in those with SIRS or sepsis and may even be harmful.[99]

Recombinant activated protein C (drotrecogin alpha) was originally introduced for severe sepsis (as identified by a high APACHE II score), where it was thought to confer a survival benefit.[88] However, subsequent studies showed that it increased adverse events—bleeding risk in particular—and did not decrease mortality.[100] It was removed from sale in 2011.[100] Another medication known as eritoran also has not shown benefit.[101]

In those with high blood sugar levels, insulin to bring it down to 7.8–10 mmol/L (140–180 mg/dL) is recommended, with lower levels potentially worsening outcomes.[102] Glucose levels taken from capillary blood should be interpreted with care because such measurements may not be accurate. If a person has an arterial catheter, arterial blood is recommended for blood glucose testing.[9]

Intermittent or continuous renal replacement therapy may be used if indicated. However, sodium bicarbonate is not recommended for a person with lactic acidosis secondary to hypoperfusion. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), unfractionated heparin (UFH), and mechanical prophylaxis with intermittent pneumatic compression devices are recommended for any person with sepsis at moderate to high risk of venous thromboembolism.[9] Stress ulcer prevention with proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) and H2 antagonist are useful in a person with risk factors of developing upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) such as on mechanical ventilation for more than 48 hours, coagulation disorders, liver disease, and renal replacement therapy.[9] Achieving partial or full enteral feeding (delivery of nutrients through a feeding tube) is chosen as the best approach to provide nutrition for a person who is contraindicated for oral intake or unable to tolerate orally in the first seven days of sepsis when compared to intravenous nutrition. However, omega-3 fatty acids are not recommended as immune supplements for a person with sepsis or septic shock. The usage of prokinetic agents such as metoclopramide, domperidone, and erythromycin is recommended for those who are septic and unable to tolerate enteral feeding. However, these agents may precipitate prolongation of the QT interval and consequently provoke a ventricular arrhythmia such as torsades de pointes. The usage of prokinetic agents should be reassessed daily and stopped if no longer indicated.[9]

People in sepsis may have micronutrient deficiencies, including low levels of vitamin C.[103] Reviews mention that an intake of 3.0 g/day, which requires intravenous administration, may be needed to maintain normal plasma concentrations in people with sepsis or severe burn injury.[104][105]

Prognosis

Sepsis proves fatal for approximately 24.4% of people, and septic shock proves fatal for 34.7% of people within 30 days (with fatality rates for sepsis and septic shock being 32.2% and 38.5% after 90 days, respectively).[106] Lactate is a useful method of determining prognosis, with those who have a level greater than 4 mmol/L having a mortality of 40% and those with a level of less than 2 mmol/L having a mortality of less than 15%.[49]

There are several prognostic stratification systems, such as APACHE II and Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis. APACHE II factors in the person's age, underlying condition, and various physiologic variables to yield estimates of the risk of dying of severe sepsis. Of the individual covariates, the severity of the underlying disease most strongly influences the risk of death. Septic shock is also a strong predictor of short- and long-term mortality. Case-fatality rates are similar for culture-positive and culture-negative severe sepsis. The Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis (MEDS) score is simpler and useful in the emergency department environment.[107]

Some people may experience severe long-term cognitive decline following an episode of severe sepsis, but the absence of baseline neuropsychological data in most people with sepsis makes the incidence of this difficult to quantify or study.[108] Other complications in those who survive sepsis include functional decline, being unable to return to work, or in pediatrics being unable to regain baseline health status.[7] Immune dysfunction and hyperinflammation may persist long after sepsis has resolved.[7]

The global mortality rate from sepsis declined from 50% in 1990 to 35% in 2017. However, the incidence and mortality of sepsis is difficult to quantify due to changing definitions of sepsis and increased recognition of the complication over time.[7][109]

Epidemiology

Sepsis causes millions of deaths globally each year and is the most common cause of death in people who have been hospitalized.[110][88] The number of new cases of sepsis worldwide is estimated to be 18 million cases per year.[111] In the United States, sepsis affects approximately 3 in 1,000 people,[49] and severe sepsis contributes to more than 200,000 deaths per year.[112]

Sepsis occurs in 1–2% of all hospitalizations and accounts for as much as 25% of ICU bed utilization. As it is rarely reported as a primary diagnosis (often being a complication of cancer or other illness), the incidence, mortality, and morbidity rates of sepsis are probably underestimated.[30] A study of U.S. states found approximately 651 hospital stays per 100,000 population with a sepsis diagnosis in 2010.[113] It is the second-leading cause of death in non-coronary intensive care unit (ICU) and the tenth-most-common cause of death overall (the first being heart disease).[114] Children under 12 months of age and elderly people have the highest incidence of severe sepsis.[30] Among people from the U.S. who had multiple sepsis hospital admissions in 2010, those who were discharged to a skilled nursing facility or long-term care following the initial hospitalization were more likely to be readmitted than those discharged to another form of care.[113] A study of 18 U.S. states found that amongst people with Medicare in 2011, sepsis was the second most common principal reason for readmission within 30 days.[115]

Several medical conditions increase a person's susceptibility to infection and the development of sepsis. Common sepsis risk factors include age (especially the very young and old); conditions that weaken the immune system such as cancer, diabetes, or the absence of a spleen; and major trauma and burns.[4][116][117]

From 1979 to 2000, data from the United States National Hospital Discharge Survey showed that the incidence of sepsis increased fourfold, to 240 cases per 100,000 population, with a higher incidence in men when compared to women. However, the global prevalence of sepsis has been estimated to be higher in women.[16] During the same time frame, the in-hospital case fatality rate was reduced from 28% to 18%. However, according to the nationwide inpatient sample from the United States, the incidence of severe sepsis increased from 200 per 10,000 population in 2003 to 300 cases in 2007 for a population aged more than 18 years. The incidence rate is particularly high among infants, with an incidence of 500 cases per 100,000 population. Mortality related to sepsis increases with age, from less than 10% in the age group of 3 to 5 years to 60% by the sixth decade of life.[25] The increase in the average age of the population, alongside the presence of more people with chronic diseases or on immunosuppressive medications, and also the increase in the number of invasive procedures being performed, has led to an increased rate of sepsis.[26]

History

File:'ware Hitler's Greatest Ally Art.IWMPST14196.jpg
Personification of septicemia, carrying a spray can marked "Poison"

The term "σήψις" (sepsis) was introduced by Hippocrates in the fourth century BC, and it meant the process of decay or decomposition of organic matter.[118][119][120] In the eleventh century, Avicenna used the term "blood rot" for diseases linked to severe purulent process. Though severe systemic toxicity had already been observed, it was only in the 19th century that the specific term – sepsis – was used for this condition.

The terms "septicemia", also spelled "septicaemia", and "blood poisoning" referred to the microorganisms or their toxins in the blood. The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD) version 9, which was in use in the US until 2013, used the term septicemia with numerous modifiers for different diagnoses, such as "Streptococcal septicemia".[121] All those diagnoses have been converted to sepsis, again with modifiers, in ICD-10, such as "Sepsis due to streptococcus".[121]

The current terms are dependent on the microorganism that is present: bacteremia if bacteria are present in the blood at abnormal levels and are the causative issue, viremia for viruses, and fungemia for a fungus.[122]

By the end of the 19th century, it was widely believed that microbes produced substances that could injure the mammalian host and that soluble toxins released during infection caused the fever and shock that were commonplace during severe infections. Pfeiffer coined the term endotoxin at the beginning of the 20th century to denote the pyrogenic principle associated with Vibrio cholerae. It was soon realized that endotoxins were expressed by most and perhaps all gram-negative bacteria. The lipopolysaccharide character of enteric endotoxins was elucidated in 1944 by Shear.[123] The molecular character of this material was determined by Luderitz et al. in 1973.[124]

It was discovered in 1965 that a strain of C3H/HeJ mouse was immune to the endotoxin-induced shock.[125] The genetic locus for this effect was dubbed Lps. These mice were also found to be hyper-susceptible to infection by gram-negative bacteria.[126] These observations were finally linked in 1998 by the discovery of the toll-like receptor gene 4 (TLR 4).[127] Genetic mapping work, performed over five years, showed that TLR4 was the sole candidate locus within the Lps critical region; this strongly implied that a mutation within TLR4 must account for the lipopolysaccharide resistance phenotype. The defect in the TLR4 gene that led to the endotoxin-resistant phenotype was discovered to be due to a mutation in the cytoplasm.[128]

Controversy occurred in the scientific community over the use of mouse models in research into sepsis in 2013 when scientists published a review of the mouse immune system compared to the human immune system and showed that on a systems level, the two worked very differently; the authors noted that as of the date of their article over 150 clinical trials of sepsis had been conducted in humans, almost all of them supported by promising data in mice and that all of them had failed. The authors called for abandoning the use of mouse models in sepsis research; others rejected that but called for more caution in interpreting the results of mouse studies,[129] and more careful design of preclinical studies.[130][131][132][133] One approach is to rely more on studying biopsies and clinical data from people who have had sepsis, to try to identify biomarkers and drug targets for intervention.[134]

Society and culture

Economics

Sepsis was the most expensive condition treated in United States' hospital stays in 2013, at an aggregate cost of $23.6 billion for nearly 1.3 million hospitalizations.[135] Costs for sepsis hospital stays more than quadrupled since 1997 with an 11.5 percent annual increase.[136] By payer, it was the most costly condition billed to Medicare and the uninsured, the second-most costly billed to Medicaid, and the fourth-most costly billed to private insurance.[135]

Education

A large international collaboration entitled the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign" was established in 2002[137] to educate people about sepsis and to improve outcomes with sepsis. The Campaign has published an evidence-based review of management strategies for severe sepsis, with the aim of publishing a complete set of guidelines in subsequent years.[88] The guidelines were updated in 2016[138] and again in 2021.[139]

Awareness

Sepsis Alliance is a charitable organization based in the United States that was created to raise sepsis awareness among both the general public and healthcare professionals.[140] In 2011, September was declared Sepsis Awareness Month. One year later, the Global Sepsis Alliance declared September 13 World Sepsis Day.[141]

Research

File:Sepsis fig.png
Phenotypic strategy switches of microbes capable of provoking sepsis

Some authors suggest that initiating sepsis by the normally mutualistic (or neutral) members of the microbiome may not always be an accidental side effect of the deteriorating host immune system. Rather, it is often an adaptive microbial response to a sudden decline of host survival chances. Under this scenario, the microbe species provoking sepsis benefit from monopolizing the future cadaver, utilizing its biomass as decomposers, and then transmitting through soil or water to establish mutualistic relations with new individuals. The bacteria Streptococcus pneumoniae, Escherichia coli, Proteus spp., Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella spp., Clostridium spp., Lactobacillus spp., Bacteroides spp. and the fungi Candida spp. are all capable of such a high level of phenotypic plasticity. Not all cases of sepsis arise through such adaptive microbial strategy switches.[142]

Paul E. Marik's "Marik protocol", also known as the "HAT" protocol, proposed a combination of hydrocortisone, vitamin C, and thiamine as a treatment for preventing sepsis for people in intensive care. Marik's initial research, published in 2017, showed dramatic evidence of benefit, leading to the protocol becoming popular among intensive care physicians, especially after the protocol received attention on social media and National Public Radio, leading to criticism of science by press conference from the wider medical community. Subsequent independent research failed to replicate Marik's positive results, indicating the possibility that they had been compromised by bias.[143] A systematic review of trials in 2021 found that the claimed benefits of the protocol could not be confirmed.[144]

Overall, the evidence for any role of vitamin C in the treatment of sepsis remains unclear Template:As of.[145]

See also

References

Template:Reflist

External links

Template:Sister project Template:Offline

Template:Medical condition classification and resources Template:Intensive care medicine Template:Abnormal clinical and laboratory findings Template:Authority control

  1. a b c d e f Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Sepsis–3_2016
  2. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named NEJM2013
  3. a b c Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  4. a b c d e f g Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named CDC2014Q
  5. a b c d e f Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Tint2011
  6. a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  7. a b c d e f g h i j k Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  8. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  9. a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SSC–G2016
  10. a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  11. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Fang2018
  12. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Long2017
  13. a b c Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  14. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  15. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  16. a b c Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  17. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Martin2012
  18. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named pmid12682500
  19. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Hospital2012
  20. a b c d e Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  21. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named MedLP
  22. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  23. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  24. a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  25. a b c Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Mandell2014
  26. a b c Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Polat
  27. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named BlochID
  28. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Ramachandran2014
  29. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Delalove2014
  30. a b c d e f g Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Critical2005
  31. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Shukla2014
  32. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named 1992consensus
  33. a b c d Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  34. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Park2013
  35. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Cross2014
  36. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Fournier2005
  37. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Leentjens2013
  38. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Antonopoulou2011
  39. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  40. a b c Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Yuki
  41. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Fujishima2016
  42. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Nimah2003
  43. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Marik2014
  44. a b c d Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Marik2014Chest
  45. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named NPR
  46. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  47. a b c Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Wacker2013
  48. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Morris2017
  49. a b c d Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Soong2012
  50. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Simpson2016
  51. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Vincent2016
  52. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Fernando2018
  53. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named pmid17948334
  54. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named pmid15636651
  55. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  56. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  57. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Backes2012
  58. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Mayr2014
  59. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Machowicz2017
  60. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Satar2012
  61. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  62. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Daniels2011
  63. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SIGN139
  64. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Sterling2015
  65. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Roberts2016
  66. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named de Caen2015
  67. a b c Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Lew2018
  68. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Zarychanski2013
  69. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Haase2013
  70. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Serpa2014
  71. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Patel2014
  72. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Holst2014
  73. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Alejandria2013
  74. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  75. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Avni2015
  76. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Hamzaoui2017
  77. a b c Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Dubin2017
  78. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Patel2012
  79. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Volbeda2015
  80. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Ni2019
  81. a b c Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named pmid18496365
  82. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Ardsnet
  83. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Cherfan2012
  84. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Chan2012
  85. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Gu2015
  86. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  87. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  88. a b c d Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Campaign2008
  89. a b c d Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named EGDT
  90. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Fuller2012
  91. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Dell2015
  92. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Rusconi2015
  93. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Shane2014
  94. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Camacho2013
  95. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named pmid12831416
  96. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Drewry2017
  97. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Niven2013
  98. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Launey2011
  99. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Szakmany2012
  100. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named APC2012
  101. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Fink2014
  102. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Hirasawa2009
  103. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  104. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  105. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  106. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named pmid32430052
  107. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Carpenter2009
  108. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Jackson2009
  109. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  110. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Deutschman2014
  111. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Lyle2014
  112. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Munford2011
  113. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named hcup-us.ahrq.gov
  114. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Martin2003
  115. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Hines2014
  116. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Koh2012
  117. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Rubin2014
  118. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Geroulanos2006
  119. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named CavaillonAdrie2008
  120. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named pmid18171697
  121. a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  122. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Merck
  123. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Shear1944
  124. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Luderitz1973
  125. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Heppner1965
  126. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Obrien1980
  127. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Poltorak1998
  128. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Poltorak1998B
  129. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  130. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Lewis2016
  131. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Mills2016
  132. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Engber2013
  133. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named pmid23401516
  134. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Haseldine2016
  135. a b Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Torio2006
  136. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Pfuntner2013
  137. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SSCHistory
  138. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  139. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  140. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named SepsisAlliance
  141. Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
  142. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Rozsa2017
  143. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  144. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
  145. Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".