Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37950017›Full record

ReviewDie Anaesthesiologie2024

[Guideline-conform treatment of sepsis].

Thomas Schmoch, Markus A Weigand, Thorsten Brenner

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Die Anaesthesiologie, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. [Necrotizing soft tissue infections].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Thomas SchmochKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin, Hôpitaux Robert Schuman, Hôpital Kirchberg, 9 , rue Edward Steichen, 2540, Luxemburg, Luxemburg. thomas.schmoch@hopitauxschuman.lu.
Markus A WeigandKlinik für Anästhesiologie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland.
Thorsten BrennerKlinik für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Deutschland.
Essen University Hospital · DEHôpital Kirchberg · LUUniversity Hospital Heidelberg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The time to administration of broad-spectrum antibiotics and (secondarily) to the initiation of hemodynamic stabilization are the most important factors influencing survival of patients with sepsis and septic shock; however, the basic prerequisite for the initiation of an adequate treatment is that a suspected diagnosis of sepsis is made first. Therefore, the treatment of sepsis, even before it has begun, is an interdisciplinary and interprofessional task. This article provides an overview of the current state of the art in sepsis treatment and points towards new evidence that has the potential to change guideline recommendations in the coming years. In summary, the following points are critical: (1) sepsis must be diagnosed as soon as possible and the implementation of a source control intervention (in case of a controllable source) has to be implemented as soon as (logistically) possible. (2) In general, intravenous broad-spectrum antibiotics should be given within the first hour after diagnosis if sepsis or septic shock is suspected. In organ dysfunction without shock, where sepsis is a possible but unlikely cause, the results of focused advanced diagnostics should be awaited before a decision to give broad-spectrum antibiotics is made. If it is not clear within 3 h whether sepsis is the cause, broad-spectrum antibiotics should be given when in doubt. Administer beta-lactam antibiotics as a prolonged (or if therapeutic drug monitoring is available, continuous) infusion after an initial loading dose. (3) Combination treatment with two agents for one pathogen group should remain the exception (e.g. multidrug-resistant gram-negative pathogens). (4) In the case of doubt, the duration of anti-infective treatment should rather be shorter than longer. Procalcitonin can support the clinical decision to stop (not to start!) antibiotic treatment! (5) For fluid treatment, if hypoperfusion is present, the first (approximately) 2L (30 ml/kg BW) of crystalloid solution is usually safe and indicated. After that, the rule is: less is more! Any further fluid administration should be carefully weighed up with the help of dynamic parameters, the patient's clinical condition and echo(cardio)graphy.

Indexed as

SepsisShock, SepticAnti-Bacterial Agentsbeta Lactam AntibioticsCombined Modality TherapyHumansAnti-Bacterial Agentsbeta Lactam AntibioticsAntiinfective therapyHemodynamic stabilizationProlonged antibiotic administrationSeptic shockSupportive therapy

Identifiers

PMID37950017
OpenAlexW4388565141

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.