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

Exploring the incidence and risk factors of reoperation for symptomatic adjacent segment disease following cervical decompression and fusion

ABSTRACT: Background: Patients with long-term follow-up after cervical decompression and fusion have often been noted to have development of adjacent segment degeneration with a smaller subset of these patients progressing to adjacent segment disease (ASD), which results in the development of new symptomatic radiculopathy or myelopathy referable to a site either directly above or below a prior fused segment. The cause of ASD is multifactorial often involving natural age-related progression of spondylosis, accelerated progression following cervical decompression and fusion, operative technique, and patient-related factors. The effect of age at the time of index cervical decompression and fusion on the need for reoperation for ASD is not fully understood. This study aims to establish underlying risk factors for the development of symptomatic cervical ASD following cervical decompression and fusion requiring reoperation in patients of various age groups. Methods: A retrospective database review of patients aged 20 or greater with insurance claims of primary cervical decompression and fusion over the course of 11 years and 10 months (January 01, 2010–October 31, 2022) was conducted using an insurance claims database. The primary outcome was to evaluate the incidence of cervical ASD requiring reoperation amongst patients stratified by age at the time of their primary procedure. Secondary outcomes included an evaluation of various risk factors for ASD following cervical decompression and fusion including surgeon-controlled factors such as the number of levels fused and approach taken, patient cervical pathology including cervical disc disorder and cervical spondylosis, and underlying patient medical comorbidities including osteoporosis and vitamin D deficiency, and substance use. Results: A total of 60,292 patient records were analyzed, where the overall reoperation incidence for symptomatic ASD was 6.57%, peaking at 8.12% among those aged 30 to 39 and decreasing with age. Regression analysis revealed ages lower than 50 years as more predictive for the development of symptomatic ASD requiring reoperation. Multivariate regression analysis identified predictive factors for reoperation, including age, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI), multiple-level surgery, cervical spondylosis, cervical disc disorder, osteoporosis, and vitamin D deficiency. Notably, these factors had a variable impact across various age groups, as revealed by subgroup analysis. Conclusions: The incidence of reoperation secondary to symptomatic ASD is 6.57%, highest in those aged 30 to 39. The surgical approach had no significant impact on the need for reoperation, but multiple-level fusions posed a consistent risk in the development of symptomatic ASD requiring reoperation. Patient factors like degenerative disc disease, spondylosis, osteoporosis, and vitamin D deficiency were associated, urging further age-specific risk assessment and nonoperative intervention exploration

Factors Associated With Inability to Bear Weight Following Hip Fracture Surgery: An Analysis of the ACS-NSQIP Hip Fracture Procedure Targeted Database

Introduction: While the benefits of early mobility for prevention of complications such as pneumonia, thromboembolic events, and improved mortality have been well studied in postsurgical patients, it is unclear which patients may struggle to achieve full weight-bearing on the first postoperative day. Materials and Methods: The 2016 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) Targeted Hip Fracture Database was queried regarding the ability to achieve weight-bearing on first postoperative day for older adults. Cases that occurred secondary to malignancy were excluded or for which weight-bearing was unachievable on the first postoperative day due to medical reasons were excluded. Results: A total of 6404 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria for the study, with 1640 (25.6%) patients unable to bear weight on the first postoperative day. Following adjusted analysis, nonmodifiable patient factors such as dependent (partial or total) functional health status, dyspnea with moderate exertion (odds ratio [OR]: 1.31 [95% confidence interval, CI: 1.04-1.65]), ventilator dependency, and preoperative dementia on presentation to hospital were associated with lack of achievement of weight-bearing on the first postoperative day. Modifiable patient factors such as presence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (OR: 1.35 [95% CI: 1.11-1.64]), delirium, and low preoperative hematocrit and modifiable system factors including delayed time to surgery, total postoperative time >90 minutes, and transfer from an outside emergency department were also associated with inability to achieve weight-bearing on the first postoperative day. Discussion: Medical teams can utilize the results from this study to better identify patients preoperatively who may be at risk of not achieving early mobilization and proactively employ implement strategies to encourage mobility as soon as possible for hip fracture patients

Clonidine in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery

Abstract BACKGROUND: Marked activation of the sympathetic nervous system occurs during and after noncardiac surgery. Low-dose clonidine, which blunts central sympathetic outflow, may prevent perioperative myocardial infarction and death without inducing hemodynamic instability. METHODS: We performed a blinded, randomized trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design to allow separate evaluation of low-dose clonidine versus placebo and low-dose aspirin versus placebo in patients with, or at risk for, atherosclerotic disease who were undergoing noncardiac surgery. A total of 10,010 patients at 135 centers in 23 countries were enrolled. For the comparison of clonidine with placebo, patients were randomly assigned to receive clonidine (0.2 mg per day) or placebo just before surgery, with the study drug continued until 72 hours after surgery. The primary outcome was a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction at 30 days. RESULTS: Clonidine, as compared with placebo, did not reduce the number of primary-outcome events (367 and 339, respectively; hazard ratio with clonidine, 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93 to 1.26; P=0.29). Myocardial infarction occurred in 329 patients (6.6%) assigned to clonidine and in 295 patients (5.9%) assigned to placebo (hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.30; P=0.18). Significantly more patients in the clonidine group than in the placebo group had clinically important hypotension (2385 patients [47.6%] vs. 1854 patients [37.1%]; hazard ratio 1.32; 95% CI, 1.24 to 1.40; P<0.001). Clonidine, as compared with placebo, was associated with an increased rate of nonfatal cardiac arrest (0.3% [16 patients] vs. 0.1% [5 patients]; hazard ratio, 3.20; 95% CI, 1.17 to 8.73; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Administration of low-dose clonidine in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery did not reduce the rate of the composite outcome of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction; it did, however, increase the risk of clinically important hypotension and nonfatal cardiac arrest. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; POISE-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01082874.). Comment in The yin and yang of perioperative medicine. [N Engl J Med. 2014

Aspirin in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery

Abstract BACKGROUND: There is substantial variability in the perioperative administration of aspirin in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, both among patients who are already on an aspirin regimen and among those who are not. METHODS: Using a 2-by-2 factorial trial design, we randomly assigned 10,010 patients who were preparing to undergo noncardiac surgery and were at risk for vascular complications to receive aspirin or placebo and clonidine or placebo. The results of the aspirin trial are reported here. The patients were stratified according to whether they had not been taking aspirin before the study (initiation stratum, with 5628 patients) or they were already on an aspirin regimen (continuation stratum, with 4382 patients). Patients started taking aspirin (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo just before surgery and continued it daily (at a dose of 100 mg) for 30 days in the initiation stratum and for 7 days in the continuation stratum, after which patients resumed their regular aspirin regimen. The primary outcome was a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction at 30 days. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 351 of 4998 patients (7.0%) in the aspirin group and in 355 of 5012 patients (7.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the aspirin group, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86 to 1.15; P=0.92). Major bleeding was more common in the aspirin group than in the placebo group (230 patients [4.6%] vs. 188 patients [3.8%]; hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.01, to 1.49; P=0.04). The primary and secondary outcome results were similar in the two aspirin strata. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of aspirin before surgery and throughout the early postsurgical period had no significant effect on the rate of a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction but increased the risk of major bleeding. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; POISE-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01082874.). Comment in The yin and yang of perioperative medicine. [N Engl J Med. 201