Sepsis and septic shock: Guideline-based management

REFERENCES

1. ↵
   1. Angus DC,
   2. Linde-Zwirble WT,
   3. Lidicker J,
   4. Clermont G,
   5. Carcillo J,
   6. Pin-sky MR

   . Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence, outcome, and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med 2001; 29(7):1303–1310. doi:10.1097/00003246-200107000-00002

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
2. ↵
   1. Hall MJ,
   2. Williams SN,
   3. DeFrances CJ,
   4. Golosinskiy A

   . Inpatient care for septicemia or sepsis: a challenge for patients and hospitals. NCHS Data Brief 2011; (62):1–8. pmid:22142805

   OpenUrlPubMed
3. ↵
   1. Dellinger RP

   . The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: where have we been and where are we going? Cleve Clin J Med 2015; 82(4):237–244. doi:10.3949/ccjm.82gr.15001

   OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
4. ↵
   1. Bone RC,
   2. Balk RA,
   3. Cerra FB, et al

   . Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Chest 1992; 101:(6)1644–1655. doi:10.1378/chest.101.6.1644

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
5. ↵
   1. Levy MM,
   2. Fink MP,
   3. Marshall JC, et al. SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS

   . 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference. Crit Care Med 2003; 31(4):1250–1256. doi:10.1097/01.CCM.0000050454.01978.3B

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
6. ↵
   1. Levy MM,
   2. Rhodes A,
   3. Phillips GS, et al

   . Surviving Sepsis Campaign: association between performance metrics and outcomes in a 7.5-year study. Crit Care Med 2015; 43(1):3–12. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000000723

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
7. ↵
   1. National Quality Forum (NQF)

   . NQF revises sepsis measure. www.qualityforum.org/NQF_Revises_Sepsis_Measure.aspx. Accessed December 11, 2019.
8. ↵
   1. Singer M,
   2. Deutschman CS,
   3. Seymour CW, et al

   . The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA 2016; 315(8):801–810. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.0287

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
9. ↵
   1. Vincent JL,
   2. Moreno R,
   3. Takala J, et al

   . The SOFA (Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment) score to describe organ dysfunction/failure. On behalf of the Working Group on Sepsis-Related Problems of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med 1996; 22(7):707–710. pmid:8844239

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
10. ↵
    1. Fernando SM,
    2. Tran A,
    3. Taljaard M, et al

    . Systemic inflamatory response syndrome, quick sequential organ function assessment, and organ dysfunction: insights from a prospective database of ED patients with infection. Ann Intern Med 2018; 168(4):266–275. doi:10.7326/M17-2820

    OpenUrlCrossRef
11. ↵
    1. Gül F,
    2. Arslantas MK,
    3. Cinel I,
    4. Kumar A

    . Changing definitions of sepsis. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim 2017; 45(3):129–138. doi:10.5152/TJAR.2017.93753

    OpenUrlCrossRef
12. ↵
    1. Seymour CW,
    2. Liu VX,
    3. Iwashyna TJ, et al

    . Assessment of clinical criteria for sepsis: for the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA 2016; 315(8):762–774. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.0288

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
13. ↵
    1. Williams JM,
    2. Greenslade JH,
    3. McKenzie JV,
    4. Chu K,
    5. Brown AFT,
    6. Lipman J

    . Systemic inflammatory response syndrome, quick sequential organ function assessment, and organ dysfunction: insights from a prospective database of ED patients with infection. Chest 2017; 151(3):586–596. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2016.10.057

    OpenUrlCrossRef
14. ↵
    1. Kumar A,
    2. Ellis P,
    3. Arabi Y, et al. Cooperative Antimicrobial Therapy of Septic Shock Database Research Group

    . Initiation of inappropriate antimicrobial therapy results in a fivefold reduction of survival in human septic shock. Chest 2009; 136(5):1237–1248. doi:10.1378/chest.09-0087

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
15. 1. Kumar A,
    2. Roberts D,
    3. Wood KE, et al

    . Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med 2006; 34(6):1589–1596. doi:10.1097/01.CCM.0000217961.75225.E9

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
16. ↵
    1. Ferrer R,
    2. Martin-Loeches I,
    3. Phillips G, et al

    . Empiric antibiotic treatment reduces mortality in severe sepsis and septic shock from the first hour: results from a guideline-based performance improvement program. Crit Care Med 2014; 42(8):1749–1755. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000000330

    OpenUrlCrossRef
17. ↵
    1. Rhodes A,
    2. Evans LE,
    3. Alhazzani W, et al

    . Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock: 2016. Intensive Care Med 2017; 43(3):304–377. doi:10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
18. ↵
    1. Micek ST,
    2. Welch EC,
    3. Khan J, et al

    . Empiric combination antibiotic therapy is associated with improved outcome against sepsis due to Gram-negative bacteria: a retrospective analysis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010; 54(5):1742–1748. doi:10.1128/AAC.01365-09

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
19. ↵
    1. Martin GS,
    2. Mannino DM,
    3. Eaton S,
    4. Moss M

    . The epidemiology of sepsis in the United States from 1979 through 2000. N Engl J Med 2003; 348(16):1546–1554. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa022139

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
20. ↵
    1. Pappas PG,
    2. Kauffman CA,
    3. Andes DR, et al

    . Clinical practice guideline for the management of candidiasis: 2016 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2016; 62(4):e1–e50. doi:10.1093/cid/civ933

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
21. ↵
    1. Garnacho-Montero J,
    2. Gutiérrez-Pizarraya A,
    3. Escoresca-Ortega A, et al

    . De-escalation of empirical therapy is associated with lower mortality in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. Intensive Care Med 2014; 40(1):32–40. doi:10.1007/s00134-013-3077-7

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
22. ↵
    1. Paonessa JR,
    2. Shah RD,
    3. Pickens CI, et al

    . Rapid detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in BAL. Chest 2019; 155(5):999–1007. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2019.02.007

    OpenUrlCrossRef
23. ↵
    1. Parente DM,
    2. Cunha CB,
    3. Mylonakis E,
    4. Timbrook TT

    . The clinical utility of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal screening to rule out MRSA pneumonia: a diagnostic meta-analysis with antimicrobial stewardship implications. Clin Infect Dis 2018; 67(1):1–7. doi:10.1093/cid/ciy024

    OpenUrlCrossRef
24. ↵
    1. Chastre J,
    2. Wolff M,
    3. Fagon JY, et al. PneumA Trial Group

    . Comparison of 8 vs 15 days of antibiotic therapy for ventilator-associated pneumonia in adults: a randomized trial. JAMA 2003; 290(19):2588–2598. doi:10.1001/jama.290.19.2588

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
25. ↵
    1. Pugh R,
    2. Grant C,
    3. Cooke RP,
    4. Dempsey G

    . Short-course versus prolonged-course antibiotic therapy for hospital-acquired pneumonia in critically ill adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011; (10):CD007577. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD007577.pub2

    OpenUrlCrossRef
26. ↵
    1. Sakr Y,
    2. Rubatto Birri PN,
    3. Kotfis K, et al. Intensive Care Over Nations Investigators

    . Higher fluid balance increases the risk of death from sepsis: results from a large international audit. Crit Care Med 2017; 45(3):386–394. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000002189

    OpenUrlCrossRef
27. ↵
    1. Malbrain ML,
    2. Marik PE,
    3. Witters I, et al

    . Fluid overload, de-resuscitation, and outcomes in critically ill or injured patients: a systematic review with suggestions for clinical practice. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther 2014; 46(5):361–380. doi:10.5603/AIT.2014.0060

    OpenUrlCrossRef
28. ↵
    1. Seymour CW,
    2. Gesten F,
    3. Prescott HC, et al

    . Time to treatment and mortality during mandated emergency care for sepsis. N Engl J Med 2017; 376(23):2235–2244. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1703058

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
29. ↵
    1. Marik PE,
    2. Baram M,
    3. Vahid B

    . Does central venous pressure predict fluid responsiveness? A systematic review of the literature and the tale of seven mares. Chest 2008; 134(1):172–178. doi:10.1378/chest.07-2331.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
30. ↵
    1. Bednarczyk JM,
    2. Fridfinnson JA,
    3. Kumar A, et al

    . Incorporating dynamic assessment of fluid responsiveness into goal-directed therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med 2017; 45(9):1538–1545. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000002554

    OpenUrlCrossRef
31. ↵
    1. Marik PE,
    2. Cavallazzi R,
    3. Vasu T,
    4. Hirani A

    . Dynamic changes in arterial waveform derived variables and fluid responsiveness in mechanically ventilated patients: a systematic review of the literature. Crit Care Med 2009; 37(9):2642–2647. doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181a590da

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
32. ↵
    1. Monnet X,
    2. Marik P,
    3. Teboul JL

    . Passive leg raising for predicting fluid responsiveness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med 2016; 42(12):1935–1947. doi:10.1007/s00134-015-4134-1

    OpenUrlCrossRef
33. ↵
    1. Cecconi M,
    2. De Backer D,
    3. Antonelli M, et al

    . Consensus on circulatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring. Task force of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med 2014; 40(12):1795–1815. doi:10.1007/s00134-014-3525-z

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
34. ↵
    1. Mahjoub Y,
    2. Lejeune V,
    3. Muller L, et al

    . Evaluation of pulse pressure variation validity criteria in critically ill patients: a prospective observational multicentre point-prevalence study. Br J Anaesth 2014; 112(4):681–685. doi:10.1093/bja/aet442

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
35. ↵
    1. Cherpanath TG,
    2. Hirsch A,
    3. Geerts BF, et al

    . Predicting fluid responsiveness by passive leg raising: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 23 clinical trials. Crit Care Med 2016; 44(5):981–991. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000001556

    OpenUrlCrossRef
36. ↵
    1. Jansen TC,
    2. van Bommel J,
    3. Schoonderbeek FJ, et al. LACTATE study group

    . Early lactate-guided therapy in intensive care unit patients: a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2010; 182(6):752–761. doi:10.1164/rccm.200912-1918OC

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
37. ↵
    1. Casserly B,
    2. Phillips GS,
    3. Schorr C, et al

    . Lactate measurements in sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion: results from the Surviving Sepsis Campaign database. Crit Care Med 2015; 43(3):567–573. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000000742

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
38. ↵
    1. Jones AE,
    2. Shapiro NI,
    3. Trzeciak S,
    4. Arnold RC,
    5. Claremont HA,
    6. Kline JA; Emergency Medicine Shock Research Network (EMShockNet) Investigators

    . Lactate clearance vs central venous oxygen saturation as goals of early sepsis therapy: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2010; 303(8):739–746. doi:10.1001/jama.2010.158

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
39. ↵
    1. Hernández G,
    2. Ospina-Tascón GA,
    3. Damiani LP, et al

    . Effect of a resuscitation strategy targeting peripheral perfusion status vs serum lactate levels on 28-day mortality among patients with septic shock: The ANDROMEDA-SHOCK Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2019; 321(7):654–664. doi:10.1001/jama.2019.0071

    OpenUrlCrossRef
40. ↵
    1. Semler MW,
    2. Self WH,
    3. Wanderer JP, et al. SMART Investigators and the Pragmatic Critical Care Research Group

    . Balanced crystalloids versus saline in critically ill adults. N Engl J Med 2018; 378(9):829–839. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1711584

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
41. 1. Young P,
    2. Bailey M,
    3. Beasley R, et al. SPLIT Investigators; ANZICS CTG

    . Effect of a buffered crystalloid solution vs saline on acute kidney injury among patients in the intensive care unit: the SPLIT Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2015; 314(16):1701–1710. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.12334

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
42. ↵
    1. Krajewski ML,
    2. Raghunathan K,
    3. Paluszkiewicz SM,
    4. Schermer CR,
    5. Shaw AD

    . Meta-analysis of high- versus low-chloride content in perioperative and critical care fluid resuscitation. Br J Surg 2015; 102(1):24–36. doi:10.1002/bjs.9651

    OpenUrlCrossRef
43. ↵
    1. Finfer S,
    2. Bellomo R,
    3. Boyce N,
    4. French J,
    5. Myburgh J,
    6. Norton R; SAFE Study Investigators

    . A comparison of albumin and saline for fluid resuscitation in the intensive care unit. N Engl J Med 2004; 350(22):2247–2256. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa040232

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
44. 1. Caironi P,
    2. Gattinoni L

    . The clinical use of albumin: the point of view of a specialist in intensive care. Blood Transfus 2009; 7(4):259–267. doi:10.2450/2009.0002-09

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
45. ↵
    1. Annane D,
    2. Siami S,
    3. Jaber S, et al. CRISTAL Investigators

    . Effects of fluid resuscitation with colloids vs crystalloids on mortality in critically ill patients presenting with hypovolemic shock: the CRISTAL randomized trial. JAMA 2013; 310(17):1809–1817. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.280502

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
46. ↵
    1. Jiang L,
    2. Jiang S,
    3. Zhang M,
    4. Zheng Z,
    5. Ma Y

    . Albumin versus other fluids for fluid resuscitation in patients with sepsis: a meta-analysis. PLoS One 2014; 9(12):e114666. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0114666

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
47. ↵
    1. Perner A,
    2. Haase N,
    3. Guttormsen AB, et al. 6S Trial Group; Scandinavian Critical Care Trials Group

    . Hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.42 versus Ringer’s acetate in severe sepsis. N Engl J Med 2012; 367(2):124–134. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1204242

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
48. ↵
    1. Jimenez MF,
    2. Marshall JC; International Sepsis Forum

    . Source control in the management of sepsis. Intensive Care Med 2001; 27(suppl 1):S49–S62. pmid:11307370

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
49. ↵
    1. Asfar P,
    2. Meziani F,
    3. Hamel JF, et al. SEPSISPAM Investigators

    . High versus low blood-pressure target in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 2014; 370(17):1583–1593. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1312173

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
50. ↵
    1. Leone M,
    2. Asfar P,
    3. Radermacher P,
    4. Vincent JL,
    5. Martin C

    . Optimizing mean arterial pressure in septic shock: a critical reappraisal of the literature. Crit Care 2015; 19:101. doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0794-z

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
51. ↵
    1. De Backer D,
    2. Biston P,
    3. Devriendt J, et al. SOAP II Investigators

    . Comparison of dopamine and norepinephrine in the treatment of shock. N Engl J Med 2010; 362(9):779–789. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0907118

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
52. ↵
    1. De Backer D,
    2. Aldecoa C,
    3. Njimi H,
    4. Vincent JL

    . Dopamine versus norepinephrine in the treatment of septic shock: a meta-analysis. Crit Care Med 2012; 40(3):725–730. doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e31823778ee.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
53. ↵
    1. Avni T,
    2. Lador A,
    3. Lev S,
    4. Leibovici L,
    5. Paul M,
    6. Grossman A

    . Vasopressors for the treatment of septic shock: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2015; 10(8):e0129305. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0129305

    OpenUrlCrossRef
54. ↵
    1. Gamper G,
    2. Havel C,
    3. Arrich J, et al

    . Vasopressors for hypotensive shock. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016; 2:CD003709. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003709.pub4

    OpenUrlCrossRef
55. ↵
    1. Scheeren TWL,
    2. Bakker J,
    3. De Backer D, et al

    . Current use of vasopressors in septic shock. Ann Intensive Care 2019; 9(1):20. doi:10.1186/s13613-019-0498-7

    OpenUrlCrossRef
56. ↵
    1. Gordon AC,
    2. Mason AJ,
    3. Thirunavukkarasu N, et al. VANISH Investigators

    . Effect of early vasopressin vs norepinephrine on kidney failure in patients with septic shock: the VANISH Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2016; 316(5):509–518. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.10485

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
57. ↵
    1. Russell JA,
    2. Walley KR,
    3. Singer J, et al. VASST Investigators

    . Vasopressin versus norepinephrine infusion in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 2008; 358(9):877–887. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa067373

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
58. ↵
    1. Levy B,
    2. Perez P,
    3. Perny J,
    4. Thivilier C,
    5. Gerard A

    . Comparison of norepinephrine-dobutamine to epinephrine for hemodynamics, lactate metabolism, and organ function variables in cardiogenic shock. A prospective, randomized pilot study. Crit Care Med 2011; 39(3):450–455. doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181ffe0eb

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
59. ↵
    1. Vail E,
    2. Gershengorn HB,
    3. Hua M,
    4. Walkey AJ,
    5. Rubenfeld G,
    6. Wunsch H

    . Association between US norepinephrine shortage and mortality among patients with septic shock. JAMA 2017; 317(14):1433–1442. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.2841

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
60. ↵
    1. Khanna A,
    2. English SW,
    3. Wang XS, et al. ATHOS-3 Investigators

    . Angiotensin II for the treatment of vasodilatory shock. N Engl J Med 2017; 377(5):419–430. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1704154

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
61. ↵
    1. Rivers E,
    2. Nguyen B,
    3. Havstad S, et al. Early Goal-Directed Therapy Collaborative Group

    . Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med 2001; 345(19):1368–1377. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa010307

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
62. ↵
    1. Annane D,
    2. Vignon P,
    3. Renault A, et al. CATS Study Group

    . Norepinephrine plus dobutamine versus epinephrine alone for management of septic shock: a randomised trial. Lancet 2007; 370(9588):676–684. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61344-0

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
63. ↵
    1. Chang W,
    2. Xie JF,
    3. Xu JY,
    4. Yang Y

    . Effect of levosimendan on mortality in severe sepsis and septic shock: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. BMJ Open 2018; 8(3):e019338. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019338

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
64. ↵
    1. Barton P,
    2. Garcia J,
    3. Kouatli A, et al

    . Hemodynamic effects of i.v. milrinone lactate in pediatric patients with septic shock. A prospective, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, interventional study. Chest 1996; 109(5):1302–1312. doi:10.1378/chest.109.5.1302

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
65. ↵
    1. Annane D,
    2. Pastores SM,
    3. Rochwerg B, et al

    . Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI) in critically ill patients (Part I): Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) 2017. Crit Care Med 2017; 45(12):2078–2088. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000002737

    OpenUrlCrossRef
66. ↵
    1. Annane D,
    2. Renault A,
    3. Brun-Buisson C, et al. CRICS-TRIGGERSEP Network

    . Hydrocortisone plus fludrocortisone for adults with septic shock. N Engl J Med 2018; 378(9):809–818. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1705716

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
67. ↵
    1. Venkatesh B,
    2. Finfer S,
    3. Cohen J, et al. ADRENAL Trial Investigators and the Australian–New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group

    . Adjunctive glucocorticoid therapy in patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 2018; 378(9):797–808. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1705835

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
68. 1. Annane D,
    2. Sébille V,
    3. Charpentier C, et al

    . Effect of treatment with low doses of hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone on mortality in patients with septic shock. JAMA 2002; 288(7):862–871. doi:10.1001/jama.288.7.862

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
69. ↵
    1. Sprung CL,
    2. Annane D,
    3. Keh D, et al. CORTICUS Study Group

    . Hydrocortisone therapy for patients with septic shock. N Engl J Med 2008; 358(2):111–124. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa071366

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
70. 1. Keh D,
    2. Trips E,
    3. Marx G, et al. SepNet–Critical Care Trials Group

    . Effect of hydrocortisone on development of shock among patients with severe sepsis: the HYPRESS Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2016; 316(17):1775–1785. doi:10.1001/jama.2016.14799

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
71. ↵
    1. Rochwerg B,
    2. Oczkowski SJ,
    3. Siemieniuk RAC, et al

    . Corticosteroids in sepsis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med 2018; 46(9):1411–1420. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000003262

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
72. ↵
    1. Annane D,
    2. Bellissant E,
    3. Bollaert PE,
    4. Briegel J,
    5. Keh D,
    6. Kupfer Y

    . Corticosteroids for treating sepsis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; (12):CD002243. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD002243.pub3

    OpenUrlCrossRef
73. ↵
    1. Cuthbertson BH,
    2. Sprung CL,
    3. Annane D, et al

    . The effects of etomidate on adrenal responsiveness and mortality in patients with septic shock. Intensive Care Med 2009; 35(11):1868–1876. doi:10.1007/s00134-009-1603-4

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
74. ↵
    1. Rello J,
    2. Valenzuela-Sánchez F,
    3. Ruiz-Rodriguez M,
    4. Moyano S

    . Sepsis: a review of advances in management. Adv Ther 2017; 34(11):2393–2411. doi:10.1007/s12325-017-0622-8

    OpenUrlCrossRef
75. ↵
    1. Matthaiou DK,
    2. Ntani G,
    3. Kontogiorgi M,
    4. Poulakou G,
    5. Armaganidis A,
    6. Dimopoulos G

    . An ESICM systematic review and meta-analysis of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic therapy algorithms in adult critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med 2012; 38(6):940–949. doi:10.1007/s00134-012-2563-7

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
76. ↵
    1. Wacker C,
    2. Prkno A,
    3. Brunkhorst FM,
    4. Schlattmann P

    . Procalcitonin as a diagnostic marker for sepsis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis 2016; 16(7):819–827. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(16)00053-0

    OpenUrlCrossRef
77. ↵
    1. de Jong E,
    2. van Oers JA,
    3. Beishuizen A, et al

    . Efficacy and safety of procalcitonin guidance in reducing the duration of antibiotic treatment in critically ill patients: a randomised, controlled, open-label trial. Lancet Infect Dis 2016; 16(7):819–827. doi:10.1016/S1473-3099(16)00053-0

    OpenUrlCrossRef
78. ↵
    1. Lam SW,
    2. Bauer SR,
    3. Fowler R,
    4. Duggal A

    . Systematic review and meta-analysis of procalcitonin-guidance versus usual care for antimicrobial management in critically ill patients: focus on subgroups based on antibiotic initiation, cessation, or mixed strategies. Crit Care Med 2018; 46(5):684–690. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000002953

    OpenUrlCrossRef
79. ↵
    1. Aguado JM,
    2. Vázquez L,
    3. Fernández-Ruiz M, et al. PCRAGA Study Group; Spanish Stem Cell Transplantation Group; Study Group of Medical Mycology of the Spanish Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases; Spanish Network for Research in Infectious Diseases

    . Serum galactomannan versus a combination of galactomannan and polymerase chain reaction-based Aspergillus DNA detection for early therapy of invasive aspergillosis in high-risk hematological patients: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis 2015; 60(3):405–414. doi:10.1093/cid/ciu833

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
80. ↵
    1. Faix JD

    . Biomarkers of sepsis. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci 2013; 50(1):23–36. doi:10.3109/10408363.2013.764490

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
81. ↵
    1. Dellinger RP,
    2. Levy MM,
    3. Rhodes A, et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee including the Pediatric Subgroup

    . Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012. Crit Care Med 2013; 41(2):580–637. doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e31827e83af

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
82. ↵
    1. ARISE Investigators; ANZICS Clinical Trials Group;
    2. Peake SL,
    3. Delaney A,
    4. Bailey M, et al

    . Goal-directed resuscitation for patients with early septic shock. N Engl J Med 2014; 371(16):1496–1506. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1404380

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
83. 1. Mouncey PR,
    2. Osborn TM,
    3. Power GS, et al. ProMISe Trial Investigators

    . Trial of early, goal-directed resuscitation for septic shock. N Engl J Med 2015; 372(14):1301–1311. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1500896

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
84. ↵
    1. ProCESS Investigators;
    2. Yealy DM,
    3. Kellum JA,
    4. Huang DT, et al

    . A randomized trial of protocol-based care for early septic shock. N Engl J Med 2014; 370(18):1683–1693. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1401602

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
85. ↵
    1. PRISM Investigators;
    2. Rowan KM,
    3. Angus DC,
    4. Bailey M, et al

    . Early, goal-directed therapy for septic shock—a patient-level meta-analysis. N Engl J Med 2017; 376(23):2223–2234. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1701380

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
86. ↵
    1. Pepper DJ,
    2. Jaswal D,
    3. Sun J,
    4. Welsh J,
    5. Natanson C,
    6. Eichacker PQ

    . Evidence underpinning the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ severe sepsis and septic shock management bundle (SEP-1): a systematic review. Ann Intern Med 2018; 168(8):558–568. doi:10.7326/M17-2947

    OpenUrlCrossRef
87. ↵
    1. Klompas M,
    2. Rhee C

    . The CMS sepsis mandate: right disease, wrong measure. Ann Intern Med 2016; 165(7):517–518. doi:10.7326/M16-0588

    OpenUrlCrossRef
88. ↵
    1. Rhee C,
    2. Filbin MR,
    3. Massaro AF, et al. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Prevention Epicenters Program

    . Compliance with the national SEP-1 quality measure and association with sepsis outcomes: a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Crit Care Med 2018; 46(10):1585–1591. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000003261

    OpenUrlCrossRef
89. ↵
    1. Marik PE,
    2. Malbrain MLNG

    . The SEP-1 quality mandate may be harmful: how to drown a patient with 30 mL per kg fluid! Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther 2017; 49(5):323–328. doi:10.5603/AIT.a2017.0056

    OpenUrlCrossRef
90. ↵
    1. Bhattacharjee P,
    2. Edelson DP,
    3. Churpek MM

    . Identifying patients with sepsis on the hospital wards. Chest 2017; 151(4):898–907. doi:10.1016/j.chest.2016.06.020

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
91. ↵
    1. Weiss CH,
    2. Moazed F,
    3. McEvoy CA, et al

    . Prompting physicians to address a daily checklist and process of care and clinical outcomes: a single-site study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2011; 184(6):680–686. doi:10.1164/rccm.201101-0037OC

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
92. ↵
    1. Scheer CS,
    2. Fuchs C,
    3. Kuhn SO, et al

    . Quality improvement initiative for severe sepsis and septic shock reduces 90-day mortality: a 7.5-year observational study. Crit Care Med 2017; 45(2):241–252. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000002069.

    OpenUrlCrossRef