The race against the "septic shark"
Authors:
Open Access
- 18 December 2015
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Springer Nature in Critical Care
- Vol. 19 (S3) , S11
Abstract
Great white sharks are responsible for about 10 cases of death annually worldwide, as compared with millions of deaths caused by sepsis. However, the basic principles of avoiding shark attacks and fighting sepsis seem to be similar: avoidance, attention, and speed, if necessary. The present review discusses the current status of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, which are actually content for discussion because of their low specificity. Current data suggest that one in eight patients with severe sepsis does not fulfill the SIRS criteria and is consequently missed, and therefore the calls for new definitions of sepsis are getting louder. Furthermore, the need for early treatment of sepsis and fast admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) with experienced stuff is reviewed as well as the early and appropriate initiation of therapy, namely antibiotic and volume therapy. A key feature is the analysis of the studies from the so-called "Sepsis Trilogy" (ProCESS, ARISE, and ProMiSe studies), with a focus on the status of early goal-directed therapy (EGDT). The authors of the "Sepsis Trilogy" concluded that there is no benefit regarding survival in septic patients by using EGDT as compared with standard therapy. However, the low mortality of the control groups within the "Sepsis Trilogy" studies as compared with the Rivers et al. study from 2001 leads to the conclusion that there has been an improvement in the therapy of septic patients, most probably due to the early initiation of therapy as a kind of "standard" in sepsis therapy. Finally, the phenomenon of a "large trial disease" is discussed, exemplary in a trial which investigated the maintenance of the "right" mean arterial pressure in sepsis patients. Even if the result of a large randomized trial might be that there is no difference between two study groups, the real exercise is to identify the patient collectives who might benefit or experience harm due to an intervention. In summary, as compared with swimming in dangerous waters, high attention is needed in handling septic patients. Once an attack has occurred, speed is of utmost importance (i.e., initiation of therapy and admission to the ICU) because it appears logical that time is critical in septic patients This may have resulted in the implementation of early (goal-directed) treatment as a "standard" in the treatment of sepsis with significant improvement in survival.Keywords
This publication has 19 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Randomized Trial of Protocol-Based Care for Early Septic ShockNew England Journal of Medicine, 2014
- High versus Low Blood-Pressure Target in Patients with Septic ShockNew England Journal of Medicine, 2014
- Circulatory ShockNew England Journal of Medicine, 2013
- Sepsis definitions: time for changeThe Lancet, 2013
- Sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock: changes in incidence, pathogens and outcomesExpert Review of Anti-infective Therapy, 2012
- Impact of time to antibiotics on survival in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock in whom early goal-directed therapy was initiated in the emergency department*Critical Care Medicine, 2010
- Three‐dimensional computer analysis of white shark jaw mechanics: how hard can a great white bite?Journal of Zoology, 2008
- Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock*Critical Care Medicine, 2006
- Early Goal-Directed Therapy in the Treatment of Severe Sepsis and Septic ShockNew England Journal of Medicine, 2001
- Dear SIRS, I'm sorry to say that I don't like youCritical Care Medicine, 1997