ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
Hour-1 Sepsis Bundle: Updated Evidence.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sepsis and septic shock remain leading causes of disability, mortality and healthcare utilization worldwide. Increasing evidence has established sepsis as a time-dependent emergency in which delays in diagnosis and treatment are associated with worsening organ dysfunction and increased mortality. To standardize early management, the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) developed evidence-based care bundles, culminating in the current Hour-1 Bundle, which emphasizes rapid implementation of key diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. This narrative review critically examines the scientific rationale, clinical evidence, implementation challenges, and future perspectives surrounding the SSC Hour-1 Bundle. Lactate remains a valuable marker of illness severity and treatment response, although its interpretation requires consideration of multiple non-hypoperfusion-related mechanisms. Blood cultures represent the microbiological gold standard, while emerging rapid diagnostic technologies are transforming pathogen identification and antimicrobial stewardship. Early effective antimicrobial therapy remains strongly associated with improved outcomes, although balancing prompt treatment with antimicrobial stewardship remains challenging. Fluid resuscitation strategies have evolved from fixed-volume approaches toward individualized assessment of fluid responsiveness and tolerance, whereas early vasopressor initiation is increasingly recognized as complementary to fluid administration. Although observational studies frequently associate bundle adherence with improved outcomes, real-world compliance remains variable and evidence supporting strict one-hour completion targets remains heterogeneous. Future developments are expected to move beyond standardized protocols toward personalized sepsis management integrating rapid diagnostics, immune phenotyping, advanced haemodynamic monitoring, and artificial intelligence-driven clinical decision support. These innovations may enable more precise therapeutic strategies while preserving the fundamental principles of sepsis management, that remain the cornerstone of contemporary sepsis care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.