Dataset Information

Outcomes of Patients With Sepsis and Septic Shock Requiring Source Control: A Prospective Observational Single-Center Study.

ABSTRACT: Source control is important in management of septic shock. We studied differences in outcomes of patients with sepsis and septic shock who required source control intervention compared with those who did not need such intervention and the effect of the timing of source control on various clinical outcomes.

Design

Prospective observational study from February 28, 2020, to March 31, 2021.

Setting

Medical ICU of academic quaternary medical center.

Patients

Two hundred five adult (≥18 yr) ICU patients.

Interventions

None.

Measurements and main results

Patients were divided into a medical treatment group and a source control group. Patients requiring source control were further divided into early (intervention performed < 24 hr) and late (≥ 24 hr) source control groups. The primary outcomes were 30-day and ICU mortality. Secondary outcomes were ICU and hospital length of stay (LOS), days on mechanical ventilation, and need for renal replacement therapy. A total of 45.9% patients underwent source control. Of these, early source control was performed in 44.7% and late source control in 55.3% of patients. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality or ICU mortality in the medical versus source control groups or in early versus late source control groups. Compared with the medical group, mean hospital LOS (11.5 vs 17.4 d; p < 0.01) and ICU LOS (5.2 vs 7.7 d; p < 0.01) were longer in the source control group. The hospital LOS (12.5 vs 21.4 d; p < 0.01) and ICU LOS (5.2 vs 9.7 d; p < 0.01) were also longer in patients who had delayed source control than in patients who had early source control. There were no significant differences in other outcomes.

Conclusions

Although mortality was similar, patients who had delayed source control had a longer ICU and hospital LOS. Early source control may improve health care utilization in septic shock patients.

SUBMITTER: Naqvi F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9722751 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Outcomes of Patients With Sepsis and Septic Shock Requiring Source Control: A Prospective Observational Single-Center Study.

Naqvi Fatima F Jain Pranav P Umer Amna A Rana Bilal B Hadique Sarah S

Critical care explorations 20221201 12

Source control is important in management of septic shock. We studied differences in outcomes of patients with sepsis and septic shock who required source control intervention compared with those who did not need such intervention and the effect of the timing of source control on various clinical outcomes.<h4>Design</h4>Prospective observational study from February 28, 2020, to March 31, 2021.<h4>Setting</h4>Medical ICU of academic quaternary medical center.<h4>Patients</h4>Two hundred five adul ...[more]

PMID: 36506829

Similar Datasets

Project description:Sex differences in the in-hospital management of sepsis exist. Previous studies either included patients with sepsis that was defined using previous definitions of sepsis or evaluated the 3-h bundle therapy. Therefore, this study sought to assess sex differences in 1-h bundle therapy and in-hospital management among patients with sepsis and septic shock, defined according to the Sepsis-3 definitions. This observational study used data from Korean Shock Society (KoSS) registry, a prospective multicenter sepsis registry. Adult patients with sepsis between June 2018 and December 2021 were included in this study. The primary outcome was adherence to 1-h bundle therapy. Propensity score matching (PSM) and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. Among 3264 patients with sepsis, 3129 were analyzed. PSM yielded 2380 matched patients (1190 men and 1190 women). After PSM, 1-h bundle therapy was performed less frequently in women than in men (13.0% vs. 19.2%; p < 0.001). Among the bundle therapy components, broad-spectrum antibiotics were administered less frequently in women than in men (25.4% vs. 31.6%, p < 0.001), whereas adequate fluid resuscitation was performed more frequently in women than in men (96.8% vs. 95.0%, p = 0.029). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, 1-h bundle therapy was performed less frequently in women than in men [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.559; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.245-1.951; p < 0.001] after adjustment. Among the bundle therapy components, broad-spectrum antibiotics were administered less frequently to women than men (aOR 1.339, 95% CI 1.118-1.605; p = 0.002), whereas adequate fluid resuscitation was performed more frequently for women than for men (aOR 0.629, 95% CI 0.413-0.959; p = 0.031). Invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring was performed less frequently in women than in men. Resuscitation fluid, vasopressor, steroid, central-line insertion, ICU admission, length of stay in the emergency department, mechanical ventilator use, and renal replacement therapy use were comparable for both the sexes. Among patients with sepsis and septic shock, 1-h bundle therapy was performed less frequently in women than in men. Continuous efforts are required to increase adherence to the 1-h bundle therapy and to decrease sex differences in the in-hospital management of patients with sepsis and septic shock.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of ≥30 mL/Kg fluid bolus in congestive heart failure (CHF) patients presenting with severe sepsis or septic shock remained controversial due to the paucity of data.MethodsThe retrospective case-control study included 671 adult patients who presented to the emergency department of a tertiary care hospital from January 01, 2017 to December 31, 2019 with severe sepsis or septic shock. Patients were categorized into the CHF group and the non-CHF group. The primary outcome was to evaluate the compliance with ≥30 mL/Kg fluid bolus within 6 hours of presentation. The comparison of baseline characteristics and secondary outcomes were done between the groups who received ≥30 mL/Kg fluid bolus. For the subgroup analysis of the CHF group, it was divided based on if they received ≥30 mL/Kg fluid bolus or not, and comparison was done for baseline characteristics and secondary outcomes. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to explore the differences between the groups for in-hospital mortality and mechanical ventilation.ResultsThe use of ≥30 mL/Kg fluid bolus was low in both the CHF and non-CHF groups [39% vs. 66% (p<0.05)]. Mortality was higher in the CHF group [33% vs 18% (p<0.05)]. Multivariable analysis revealed that the use of ≥30 mL/Kg fluid bolus decreased the chances of mortality by 12% [OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.82-0.95 (p<0.05)]. The use of ≥30 mL/Kg fluid bolus did not increase the odds of mechanical ventilation [OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93-1.05 (p = 0.78)]. In subgroup analysis, the use of ≥30 mL/Kg fluid bolus decreased the chances of mortality by 5% [OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90-0.99, (p<0.05)] and did not increase the odds of mechanical ventilation. The presence of the low ejection fraction did not influence the chance of getting fluid bolus.ConclusionThe use of ≥30 mL/Kg fluid bolus seems to confer protection against in-hospital mortality and is not associated with increased chances of mechanical ventilation in heart failure patients presenting with severe sepsis or septic shock.

Project description:BackgroundVasopressin is a second-line vasoactive agent for refractory septic shock. Vasopressin loading is not generally performed because of the lack of evidence for its effects and safety. However, based on our previous findings, we hypothesized it can predict the responsibility to vasopressin infusion with safety, and prospectively examined it in the present study.MethodsVasopressin loading was performed via the intravenous administration of a bolus of 1 U, followed by its continuous infusion at 1U/h in patients with septic shock treated with ≥ 0.2 μg/kg/min noradrenaline. An arterial pressure wave analysis was conducted, and endocrinological tests were performed immediately prior to vasopressin loading. We classified patients into responders/non-responders based on mean arterial pressure (MAP) changes after vasopressin loading. Based on our previous findings, the lower tertile of MAP changes was selected as the cut-off. The change in the catecholamine index (CAI) after 6 h was assigned as the primary outcome. Digital ischemia, mesenteric ischemia, and myocardial ischemia during the admission period were prospectively and systematically recorded as adverse events.ResultsNinety-two patients were registered during the study period and examined. Sixty-two patients with a MAP change > 22 mmHg were assigned as responders and the others as non-responders. Blood adrenocorticotropic hormone levels were significantly higher in non-responders. Stroke volume variations were higher in responders before loading, while stroke volume and dP/dtmax were higher in responders after loading. Median CAI changes were - 10 in responders and 0 in non-responders, which was significantly lower in the former (p < 0.0001). AUROC of MAP change with vasopressin loading to predict CAI change < 0 after continuous infusion was 0.843 with sensitivity of 0.92 and specificity of 0.77. Ischemia events were observed in 5 cases (5.4%).ConclusionsVasopressin loading may be safely introduced for septic shock. Vasopressin loading may be used to predict responses to its continuous infusion and select appropriate strategies to increase blood pressure.

Project description:BackgroundSeptic shock occurs when sepsis is related to severe hypotension and leads to a remarkable high number of deaths. The early diagnosis of septic shock is essential to reduce mortality. High-quality biomarkers can be objectively measured and evaluated as indicators to accurately predict disease diagnosis. However, single-gene prediction efficiency is inadequate; therefore, we identified a risk-score model based on gene signature to elevate predictive efficiency.MethodsThe gene expression profiles of GSE33118 and GSE26440 were downloaded from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database. These two datasets were merged, and the differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified using the limma package in R software. Gene Ontology (GO) and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway enrichments of DEGs were performed. Subsequently, Lasso regression and Boruta feature selection algorithm were combined to identify the hub genes of septic shock. GSE9692 was then subjected to weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) to identify the septic shock-related gene modules. Subsequently, the genes within such modules that matched with septic shock-related DEGs were identified as the hub genes of septic shock. To further understand the function and signaling pathways of hub genes, we performed gene set variation analysis (GSVA) and then used the CIBERSORT tool to analyze the immune cell infiltration pattern of diseases. The diagnostic value of hub genes in septic shock was determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and verified using quantitative PCR (qPCR) and Western blotting in our hospital patients with septic shock.ResultsA total of 975 DEGs in the GSE33118 and GSE26440 databases were obtained, of which 30 DEGs were remarkably upregulated. With the use of Lasso regression and Boruta feature selection algorithm, six hub genes (CD177, CLEC5A, CYSTM1, MCEMP1, MMP8, and RGL4) with expression differences in septic shock were screened as potential diagnostic markers for septic shock among the significant DEGs and were further validated in the GSE9692 dataset. WGCNA was used to identify the co-expression modules and module-trait correlation. Enrichment analysis showed significant enrichment in the reactive oxygen species pathway, hypoxia, phosphatidylinositol 3-kinases (PI3K)/Protein Kinase B (AKT)/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling, nuclear factor-κβ/tumor necrosis factor alpha (NF-κβ/TNF-α), and interleukin-6 (IL-6)/Janus Kinase (JAK)/Signal Transducers and Activators of Transcription 3 (STAT3) signaling pathways. The receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) of these signature genes was 0.938, 0.914, 0.939, 0.956, 0.932, and 0.914, respectively. In the immune cell infiltration analysis, the infiltration of M0 macrophages, activated mast cells, neutrophils, CD8 T cells, and naive B cells was more significant in the septic shock group. In addition, higher expression levels of CD177, CLEC5A, CYSTM1, MCEMP1, MMP8, and RGL4 messenger RNA (mRNA) were observed in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) isolated from septic shock patients than from healthy donors. Higher expression levels of CD177 and MMP8 proteins were also observed in the PBMCs isolated from septic shock patients than from control participants.ConclusionsCD177, CLEC5A, CYSTM1, MCEMP1, MMP8, and RGL4 were identified as hub genes, which were of considerable value in the early diagnosis of septic shock patients. These preliminary findings are of great significance for studying immune cell infiltration in the pathogenesis of septic shock, which should be further validated in clinical studies and basic studies.

Dataset Information

Outcomes of Patients With Sepsis and Septic Shock Requiring Source Control: A Prospective Observational Single-Center Study.

Design

Setting

Patients

Interventions

Measurements and main results

Conclusions

Publications

Outcomes of Patients With Sepsis and Septic Shock Requiring Source Control: A Prospective Observational Single-Center Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets