Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," last published in 2008. DESIGN: A consensus committee of 68 international experts representing 30 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict of interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independent of any industry funding. A stand-alone meeting was held for all subgroup heads, co- and vice-chairs, and selected individuals. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. METHODS: The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations as strong (1) or weak (2). The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasized. Recommendations were classified into three groups: (1) those directly targeting severe sepsis; (2) those targeting general care of the critically ill patient and considered high priority in severe sepsis; and (3) pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations and suggestions, listed by category, include: early quantitative resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 h after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm a potential source of infection (UG); administration of broad-spectrum antimicrobials therapy within 1 h of the recognition of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1C) as the goal of therapy; reassessment of antimicrobial therapy daily for de-escalation, when appropriate (1B); infection source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method within 12 h of diagnosis (1C); initial fluid resuscitation with crystalloid (1B) and consideration of the addition of albumin in patients who continue to require substantial amounts of crystalloid to maintain adequate mean arterial pressure (2C) and the avoidance of hetastarch formulations (1B); initial fluid challenge in patients with sepsis-induced tissue hypoperfusion and suspicion of hypovolemia to achieve a minimum of 30 mL/kg of crystalloids (more rapid administration and greater amounts of fluid may be needed in some patients (1C); fluid challenge technique continued as long as hemodynamic improvement is based on either dynamic or static variables (UG); norepinephrine as the first-choice vasopressor to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥65 mmHg (1B); epinephrine when an additional agent is needed to maintain adequate blood pressure (2B); vasopressin (0.03 U/min) can be added to norepinephrine to either raise mean arterial pressure to target or to decrease norepinephrine dose but should not be used as the initial vasopressor (UG); dopamine is not recommended except in highly selected circumstances (2C); dobutamine infusion administered or added to vasopressor in the presence of (a) myocardial dysfunction as suggested by elevated cardiac filling pressures and low cardiac output, or (b) ongoing signs of hypoperfusion despite achieving adequate intravascular volume and adequate mean arterial pressure (1C); avoiding use of intravenous hydrocortisone in adult septic shock patients if adequate fluid resuscitation and vasopressor therapy are able to restore hemodynamic stability (2C); hemoglobin target of 7-9 g/dL in the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, ischemic coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage (1B); low tidal volume (1A) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure (1B) for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) in ARDS (1B); higher rather than lower level of PEEP for patients with sepsis-induced moderate or severe ARDS (2C); recruitment maneuvers in sepsis patients with severe refractory hypoxemia due to ARDS (2C); prone positioning in sepsis-induced ARDS patients with a PaO (2)/FiO (2) ratio of ≤100 mm Hg in facilities that have experience with such practices (2C); head-of-bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ARDS who do not have evidence of tissue hypoperfusion (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation (1A); minimizing use of either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation targeting specific titration endpoints (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers if possible in the septic patient without ARDS (1C); a short course of neuromuscular blocker (no longer than 48 h) for patients with early ARDS and a PaO (2)/FI O (2) 180 mg/dL, targeting an upper blood glucose ≤180 mg/dL (1A); equivalency of continuous veno-venous hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1B); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with bleeding risk factors (1B); oral or enteral (if necessary) feedings, as tolerated, rather than either complete fasting or provision of only intravenous glucose within the first 48 h after a diagnosis of severe sepsis/septic shock (2C); and addressing goals of care, including treatment plans and end-of-life planning (as appropriate) (1B), as early as feasible, but within 72 h of intensive care unit admission (2C). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: therapy with face mask oxygen, high flow nasal cannula oxygen, or nasopharyngeal continuous PEEP in the presence of respiratory distress and hypoxemia (2C), use of physical examination therapeutic endpoints such as capillary refill (2C); for septic shock associated with hypovolemia, the use of crystalloids or albumin to deliver a bolus of 20 mL/kg of crystalloids (or albumin equivalent) over 5-10 min (2C); more common use of inotropes and vasodilators for low cardiac output septic shock associated with elevated systemic vascular resistance (2C); and use of hydrocortisone only in children with suspected or proven "absolute"' adrenal insufficiency (2C). CONCLUSIONS: Strong agreement existed among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best care of patients with severe sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients

Novel Recombinant Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus Circulating in Vietnam.

We report the genome sequences of 12 recombinant foot-and-mouth disease virus isolates from Vietnam. The recombinant strain has a capsid region from an A/Sea-97 strain and a nonstructural segment from an O/ME-SA/PanAsia strain. The isolates were obtained from two outbreak samples collected in June 2017 and 10 subclinical samples collected between 2017 and 2019

Pandemic H1N1 virus transmission and shedding dynamics in index case households of a prospective Vietnamese cohort.

OBJECTIVES: Influenza household transmission studies are required to guide prevention strategies but most passively recruit index cases that seek healthcare. We investigated A(H1N1)pdm09 transmission in a household-based cohort during 2009. METHODS: Health-workers visited 270 households weekly, and collected swabs from influenza-like-illness cases. If A(H1N1)pdm09 was RT-PCR-confirmed, all household members had symptoms assessed and swabs collected daily for 10-15 days. Viral RNA was quantified and sequenced and serology performed on pre-pandemic sera. RESULTS: Index cases were detected in 20 households containing 81 people. 98.5% lacked A(H1N1)pdm09 neutralizing antibodies in pre-pandemic sera. Eleven (18.6%, 95% CI 10.7-30.4%) of 59 contacts were infected. Virus genetic diversity within households was negligible and less than between households. Index and secondary cases were distributed between mothers, daughters and sons, and had similar virus-RNA shedding and symptom dynamics. Fathers were rarely infected. Five secondary cases (45%) had no apparent symptoms and three shed virus before symptoms. Secondary infection was associated with index case wet cough (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.22-1.99). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of A(H1N1)pdm09 susceptible persons, virus sequencing was capable of discriminating household from community transmission. Household transmission involved mothers and children but rarely fathers. Asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic shedding was common

Evaluation of the Luminex xTAG Respiratory Viral Panel FAST v2 assay for detection of multiple respiratory viral pathogens in nasal and throat swabs in Vietnam [version 1; referees: 2 approved]

Background: Acute respiratory infections (ARI) are among the leading causes of hospitalization in children ≤5 years old. Rapid diagnostics of viral pathogens is essential to avoid unnecessary antibiotic treatment, thereby slowing down antibiotic-resistance. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of the Luminex xTAG Respiratory Viral Panel FAST v2 against viral specific PCR as reference assays for ARI in Vietnam. Methods: Four hundred and forty two nose and throat swabs were collected in viral transport medium, and were tested with Luminex xTAG Respiratory Viral Panel FAST v2. Multiplex RT-PCR and single RT-PCR were used as references. Results: Overall, viral pathogens were detected in a total count of 270/294 (91.8%, 95% CI 88.1-94.7) by the Luminex among reference assays, whilst 112/6336 (1.8%, 95% CI, 1.4-2.1) of pathogens were detected by the Luminex, but not by reference assays. Frequency of pathogens detected by Luminex and reference assays was 379 and 292, respectively. The diagnostic yield was 66.7% (295/442, 95%CI 62.1-71.1%) for the Luminex assay and 54.1% (239/442, 95% CI, 49.3-58.8%) for reference assays. The Luminex kit had higher yields for all viruses except influenza B virus, respiratory syncytial virus, and human bocavirus. High agreements between both methods [mean (range): 0.91 (0.83-1.00)] were found for 10/15 viral agents. Conclusions: The Luminex assay is a high throughput multiplex platform for rapid detection of common viral pathogens causing ARI. Although the current high cost may prevent Luminex assays from being widely used, especially in limited resource settings where ARI are felt most, its introduction in clinical diagnostics may help reduce unnecessary use of antibiotic prescription