Surviving Sepsis Campaign Research Priorities 2023.

OBJECTIVES: To identify research priorities in the management, epidemiology, outcome, and pathophysiology of sepsis and septic shock. DESIGN: Shortly after publication of the most recent Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines, the Surviving Sepsis Research Committee, a multiprofessional group of 16 international experts representing the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Society of Critical Care Medicine, convened virtually and iteratively developed the article and recommendations, which represents an update from the 2018 Surviving Sepsis Campaign Research Priorities. METHODS: Each task force member submitted five research questions on any sepsis-related subject. Committee members then independently ranked their top three priorities from the list generated. The highest rated clinical and basic science questions were developed into the current article. RESULTS: A total of 81 questions were submitted. After merging similar questions, there were 34 clinical and ten basic science research questions submitted for voting. The five top clinical priorities were as follows: 1) what is the best strategy for screening and identification of patients with sepsis, and can predictive modeling assist in real-time recognition of sepsis? 2) what causes organ injury and dysfunction in sepsis, how should it be defined, and how can it be detected? 3) how should fluid resuscitation be individualized initially and beyond? 4) what is the best vasopressor approach for treating the different phases of septic shock? and 5) can a personalized/precision medicine approach identify optimal therapies to improve patient outcomes? The five top basic science priorities were as follows: 1) How can we improve animal models so that they more closely resemble sepsis in humans? 2) What outcome variables maximize correlations between human sepsis and animal models and are therefore most appropriate to use in both? 3) How does sepsis affect the brain, and how do sepsis-induced brain alterations contribute to organ dysfunction? How does sepsis affect interactions between neural, endocrine, and immune systems? 4) How does the microbiome affect sepsis pathobiology? 5) How do genetics and epigenetics influence the development of sepsis, the course of sepsis and the response to treatments for sepsis? CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge advances in multiple clinical domains have been incorporated in progressive iterations of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines, allowing for evidence-based recommendations for short- and long-term management of sepsis. However, the strength of existing evidence is modest with significant knowledge gaps and mortality from sepsis remains high. The priorities identified represent a roadmap for research in sepsis and septic shock.

Physical and Chemical Compatibility of Medications Commonly Used in Critically Ill Patients With Balanced Crystalloids: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate available evidence of physical and/or chemical compatibility of commonly used medications in critically ill patients with balanced crystalloids. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were queried from inception to September 2022. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: This review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. English-language studies reporting physical and/or chemical compatibility data between 50 selected medications and balanced crystalloids were included. A previously designed tool to assess risk of bias was adapted for use. DATA SYNTHESIS: Twenty-nine studies encompassing 39 (78%) medications and 188 unique combinations with balanced crystalloids were included. Combinations included 35 (70%) medications with lactated Ringer's, 26 (52%) medications with Plasma-Lyte, 10 (20%) medications with Normosol, and one (2%) medication with Isolyte. Studies commonly evaluated physical and chemical compatibility (55.2%). More medications were evaluated via Y-site than admixture. Incompatibilities were identified in 18% of combinations comprising 13 individual drugs. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: This systematic review evaluates the compatibility of select critical care medications with balanced crystalloid solutions. Results may be used as a tool to guide clinicians on balanced crystalloid compatibility, potentially increasing ubiquitous use and reducing patient exposure to normal saline. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Data are limited regarding chemical/physical compatibility of commonly used medications in critically ill patients with balanced crystalloids. Additional compatibility studies are warranted, particularly methodologically rigorous studies assessing Plasma-Lyte, Normosol, and Isolyte. Of the evaluated medications, there was a low frequency of incompatibilities with balanced crystalloids.

Vasopressin Response and Clinical Trajectory in Septic Shock Patients.

BACKGROUND: In septic shock, vasopressors aim to improve tissue perfusion and prevent persistent organ dysfunction, a characteristic of chronic critical illness (CCI). Adjunctive vasopressin is often used to decrease catecholamine dosage, but the association of vasopressin response with subsequent patient outcomes is unclear. We hypothesized vasopressin response is associated with favorable clinical trajectory. METHODS: We included patients with septic shock receiving vasopressin as a catecholamine adjunct in this retrospective cohort study. We defined vasopressin response as a lowering of the catecholamine dose required to maintain mean arterial pressure ≥65 mm Hg, 6 h after vasopressin initiation. Clinical trajectories were adjudicated as early death (ED; death before day 14), CCI (ICU stay ≥14 days with persistent organ dysfunction), or rapid recovery (RR; not meeting ED or CCI criteria). Trajectories were placed on an ordinal scale with ED the worst outcome, CCI next, and RR the best outcome. The association of vasopressin response with clinical trajectory was assessed with multivariable ordinal logistic regression. RESULTS: In total 938 patients were included; 426 (45.4%) were vasopressin responders. The most frequent trajectory was ED (49.8%), 29.7% developed CCI, and 20.5% had rapid recovery. In survivors to ICU day 14 (those without ED), 59.2% had CCI and 40.8% experienced RR. Compared with vasopressin non-responders, vasopressin responders less frequently experienced ED (42.5% vs. 55.9%) and more frequently experienced RR (24.6% vs. 17.0%; P < 0.01). After controlling for confounders, vasopressin response was independently associated with higher odds of developing a better clinical trajectory (OR 1.63; 95% CI 1.26-2.10). Medical patients most frequently developed ED and survivors more commonly developed CCI than RR; surgical patients developed the three trajectories with similar frequency (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Vasopressin responsive status was associated with improved clinical trajectory in septic shock patients. Early vasopressin response is a potential novel prognostic marker for short-term clinical trajectory.

Association between emergency department sepsis order set design and delay to second dose piperacillin-tazobactam administration.

BACKGROUND: Delay to first antibiotic dose in patients with sepsis has been associated with increased mortality. Second dose antibiotic delay has also been linked to worsened patient outcomes. Optimal methods to decrease second dose delay are currently unclear. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the association between updating an emergency department (ED) sepsis order set design from one-time doses to scheduled antibiotic frequencies and delay to administration of second piperacillin-tazobactam dose. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at eleven hospitals in a large, integrated health system and included adult patients treated in the ED with at least one dose of piperacillin-tazobactam ordered through an ED sepsis order set over a two year period. Patients were excluded if they received less than two doses of piperacillin-tazobactam. Midway through the study period, the enterprise-wide ED sepsis order set was updated to include scheduled antibiotic frequencies. Two patient cohorts receiving piperacillin-tazobactam were compared: those in the year before the order set update and those in the year post-update. The primary outcome was major delay, defined as an administration delay >25% of the recommended dosing interval, which was evaluated with multivariable logistic regression and interrupted time series analysis. RESULTS: 3219 patients were included: 1222 in the pre-update group and 1997 in the post-update group. The proportion of patients who experienced major second dose delay was significantly lower in the post-update group (32.7% vs 25.6%, p < 0.01; adjusted OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.78). No between-group difference was detected in the slope of monthly major delay frequency, but there was a significant level change (post-update change -10%, 95% CI -17.9% to -1.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Including scheduled antibiotic frequencies in ED sepsis order sets is a pragmatic mechanism to decrease delays in second antibiotic doses.

Association of Catecholamine Dose, Lactate, and Shock Duration at Vasopressin Initiation With Mortality in Patients With Septic Shock.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the association of catecholamine dose, lactate concentration, and timing from shock onset at vasopressin initiation with in-hospital mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational study using segmented and multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the associations of catecholamine dose, lactate concentration, and timing from shock onset at vasopressin initiation with in-hospital mortality. SETTING: Multiple hospitals within the Cleveland Clinic Health System. PATIENTS: Adult patients who met criteria for septic shock based on the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Adult Sepsis Event definition. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received continuous infusion vasopressin as an adjunct to catecholamine vasopressors. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In total, 1,610 patients were included with a mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III 109.0 ± 35.1 and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment 14.0 ± 3.5; 41% of patients survived the hospital admission. At the time of vasopressin initiation, patients had median (interquartile range) lactate concentration 3.9 mmol/L (2.3-7.2 mmol/L), norepinephrine-equivalent dose 25 µg/min (18-40 µg/min), and 5.3 hours (2.1-12.2 hr) elapsed since shock onset. The odds of in-hospital mortality increased 20.7% for every 10 µg/min increase in norepinephrine-equivalent dose up to 60 µg/min at the time of vasopressin initiation (adjusted odds ratio, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.09-1.34]), but no association was detected when the norepinephrine-equivalent dose exceeded 60 µg/min (adjusted odds ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.84-1.10]). There was a significant interaction between timing of vasopressin initiation and lactate concentration (p = 0.02) for the association with in-hospital mortality. A linear association between increasing in-hospital mortality was detected for increasing lactate concentration at the time of vasopressin initiation, but no association was detected for time elapsed from shock onset. CONCLUSIONS: Higher norepinephrine-equivalent dose at vasopressin initiation and higher lactate concentration at vasopressin initiation were each associated higher in-hospital mortality in patients with septic shock who received vasopressin.

Association Between Vasopressin Rebranding and Utilization in Patients With Septic Shock.

OBJECTIVES: Vasopressin is suggested as an adjunct to norepinephrine in patients with septic shock. However, after vasopressin was rebranded in November 2014, its cost exponentially increased. Utilization patterns of vasopressin after its rebranding are unclear. The objective of this study was to determine if there is an association between the rebranding of vasopressin in November 2014 and its utilization in vasopressor-dependent patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. DESIGN: Retrospective, multicenter, database study between January 2010 and March 2017. SETTING: Premier Healthcare Database hospitals. PATIENTS: Adult patients admitted to an ICU with severe sepsis or septic shock, who received at least one vasoactive agent for two or more calendar days were included. INTERVENTIONS: The proportion of patients who received vasopressin and vasopressin cost was assessed before and after rebranding, and evaluated with segmented regression. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among 294,733 patients (mean age, 66 ± 15 yr), 27.8% received vasopressin, and ICU mortality was 26.5%. The proportion of patients receiving vasopressin was higher after rebranding (31.2% postrebranding vs 25.8% prerebranding). Before vasopressin rebranding, the quarterly proportion of patients who received vasopressin had an increasing slope (prerebranding slope 0.41% [95% CI, 0.35-0.46%]), with no difference in slope detected after vasopressin rebranding (postrebranding slope, 0.47% [95% CI, 0.29-0.64%]). After vasopressin rebranding, mean vasopressin cost per patient was higher ($527 ± 1,130 vs $77 ± 160), and the quarterly slope of vasopressin cost was higher (change in slope $77.18 [95% CI, $75.73-78.61]). Total vasopressin billed cost postrebranding continually increased by ~$294,276 per quarter from less than $500,000 in Q4 2014 to over $3,000,000 in Q1 2017. CONCLUSIONS: After vasopressin rebranding, utilization continued to increase quarterly despite a significant increase in vasopressin cost. Vasopressin appeared to have price inelastic demand in septic shock.

Hemodynamic Response to Vasopressin Dosage of 0.03 Units/Min vs. 0.04 Units/Min in Patients With Septic Shock.

BACKGROUND: Arginine vasopressin (AVP) is suggested as an adjunct to norepinephrine in patients with septic shock. Guidelines recommend an AVP dosage up to 0.03 units/min, but 0.04 units/min is commonly used in practice based on initial studies. This study was designed to compare the incidence of hemodynamic response between initial fixed-dosage AVP 0.03 units/min and AVP 0.04 units/min. METHODS: This retrospective, multi-hospital health system, cohort study included adult patients with septic shock receiving AVP as an adjunct to catecholamine vasopressors. Patients were excluded if they received an initial dosage other than 0.03 units/min or 0.04 units/min, or AVP was titrated within the first 6 hours of therapy. The primary outcome was hemodynamic response, defined as a mean arterial pressure ≥65 mm Hg and a decrease in catecholamine dosage at 6 hours after AVP initiation. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) based on the propensity score for initial AVP dosage receipt was utilized to estimate adjusted exposure effects. RESULTS: Of the 1536 patients included in the observed data, there was a nearly even split between initial AVP dosage of 0.03 units/min (n = 842 [54.8%]) and 0.04 units/min (n = 694 [45.2%]). Observed patients receiving AVP 0.03 units/min were more frequently treated at the main campus academic medical center (96.3% vs. 52.2%, p < 0.01) and in a medical intensive care unit (87.4% vs. 39.8%, p < 0.01). The IPTW analysis included 1379 patients with achievement of baseline covariate balance. There was no evidence for a difference between groups in the incidence of hemodynamic response (0.03 units/min 50.0% vs. 0.04 units/min 53.1%, adjusted relative risk 1.06 [95% CI 0.94, 1.20]). CONCLUSIONS: Initial AVP dosing varied by hospital and unit type. Although commonly used, an initial AVP dosage of 0.04 units/min was not associated with a higher incidence of early hemodynamic response to AVP in patients with septic shock.

Association of Methylene Blue Dosing With Hemodynamic Response for the Treatment of Vasoplegia.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the hemodynamic response of methylene blue dosing regimens (bolus v bolus plus infusion) for the treatment of vasoplegia. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort analysis. SETTING: A single-center academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Patients who underwent cardiac surgery at Cleveland Clinic and received methylene blue between 2016 and 2019. Patients were excluded from the analysis if methylene blue was initiated >48 hours after surgery, if the cardiac index was <2.0 L/min/m2, or if they returned to the operating room for postoperative hemorrhage. INTERVENTIONS: Methylene blue bolus-only regimens versus bolus plus continuous infusion methylene blue regimens. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was vasopressor requirement over 48 hours (1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours) after methylene blue initiation. Other hemodynamic outcomes evaluated included the rate of methylene blue response, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and systemic vascular resistance (SVR) values over time. In total, 44 patients were included in the analysis, 33 of whom only received a methylene blue bolus. Vasopressor requirements at baseline were 95 (95% CI: 70-122) µg/min norepinephrine equivalent (NE) in the bolus-only group and 100 (86-130) µg/min in the infusion group. Vasopressor requirements decreased at each time point in both groups and were similar throughout (hour 1 mean [95% CI] NE, bolus 79 [67-91] µg/min v bolus plus infusion 84 [63-104] µg/min; p = 0.71). MAP, SVR, and rates of methylene blue response were similar between groups at all time points. Clinical outcomes also were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a methylene blue continuous infusion did not significantly improve hemodynamic response. Bolus-only dosing of methylene blue may be sufficient for the treatment of vasoplegia after cardiac surgery.

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Research Priorities for Coronavirus Disease 2019 in Critical Illness.

OBJECTIVES: To identify research priorities in the management, pathophysiology, and host response of coronavirus disease 2019 in critically ill patients. DESIGN: The Surviving Sepsis Research Committee, a multiprofessional group of 17 international experts representing the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and Society of Critical Care Medicine, was virtually convened during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The committee iteratively developed the recommendations and subsequent document. METHODS: Each committee member submitted a list of what they believed were the most important priorities for coronavirus disease 2019 research. The entire committee voted on 58 submitted questions to determine top priorities for coronavirus disease 2019 research. RESULTS: The Surviving Sepsis Research Committee provides 13 priorities for coronavirus disease 2019. Of these, the top six priorities were identified and include the following questions: 1) Should the approach to ventilator management differ from the standard approach in patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure?, 2) Can the host response be modulated for therapeutic benefit?, 3) What specific cells are directly targeted by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and how do these cells respond?, 4) Can early data be used to predict outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 and, by extension, to guide therapies?, 5) What is the role of prone positioning and noninvasive ventilation in nonventilated patients with coronavirus disease?, and 6) Which interventions are best to use for viral load modulation and when should they be given? CONCLUSIONS: Although knowledge of both biology and treatment has increased exponentially in the first year of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, significant knowledge gaps remain. The research priorities identified represent a roadmap for investigation in coronavirus disease 2019.

Ethanol Exposure Attenuates Immune Response in Sepsis via Sirtuin 2 Expression.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis and septic shock kill over 270,000 patients per year in the United States. Sepsis transitions from a hyper-inflammatory to a hypo-inflammatory phase. Alcohol dependence is a risk factor for mortality from sepsis. Ethanol (EtOH) exposure impairs pathogen clearance through mechanisms that are not fully understood. Sirtuin 2 (SIRT2) interferes with pathogen clearance in immune cells but its role in the effects of EtOH on sepsis is unknown. We studied the effect of EtOH exposure on hyper- and hypo-inflammation and the role of SIRT2 in mice. METHODS: We exposed C57Bl/6 (WT) mice to EtOH via drinking water and used intraperitoneal cecal slurry (CS)-induced sepsis to study: (i) 7-day survival, (ii) leukocyte adhesion (LA) in the mesenteric microcirculation during hyper- and hypo-inflammation, (iii) peritoneal cavity bacterial clearance, and (iv) SIRT2 expression in peritoneal macrophages. Using EtOH-exposed and lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-stimulated RAW 264.7 (RAW) cell macrophages for 4 hours or 24 hours, we studied: (i) tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-10 (IL-10), and SIRT2 expression, and (ii) the effect of the SIRT2 inhibitor AK-7 on inflammatory response at 24 hours. Lastly, we studied the effect of EtOH on sepsis in whole body Sirt2 knockout (SIRT2KO) mice during hyper- and hypo-inflammation, bacterial clearance, and 7-day survival. RESULTS: WT EtOH-sepsis mice showed: (i) Decreased survival, (ii) Muted LA in the microcirculation, (iii) Lower plasma TNF-α and IL-6 expression, (iv) Decreased bacterial clearance, and (v) Increased SIRT2 expression in peritoneal macrophages versus vehicle-sepsis. EtOH-exposed LPS-stimulated RAW cells showed: (i) Muted TNF-α, IL-6, and increased IL-10 expression at 4 hours, (ii) endotoxin tolerance at 24 hours, and (iii) reversal of endotoxin tolerance with the SIRT2 inhibitor AK-7. EtOH-exposed SIRT2KO-sepsis mice showed greater 7-day survival, LA, and bacterial clearance than WT EtOH-sepsis mice. CONCLUSION: EtOH exposure decreases survival and reduces the inflammatory response to sepsis via increased SIRT2 expression. SIRT2 is a potential therapeutic target in EtOH with sepsis.

Mortality, Morbidity, and Costs After Implementation of a Vasopressin Guideline in Medical Intensive Care Patients With Septic Shock: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis.

Background: Vasopressin decreases vasopressor requirements in patients with septic shock. However, the optimal norepinephrine dose for initiation or cessation of vasopressin is unclear. Objective: Analyze monthly intensive care unit (ICU) mortality rates 1 year preimplementation and postimplementation of a guideline suggesting a norepinephrine dose of 50 µg/min or more for initiation of vasopressin and early cessation of vasopressin. Methods: This retrospective quasi-experimental study included adult patients with septic shock admitted to the medical ICU of a tertiary care medical center over 2 years. Time periods were evaluated with interrupted time series analysis. Results: A total of 1148 patients were included: 573 patients preguideline and 575 patients postguideline. Group characteristics were well balanced at baseline, except patients postguideline had higher sequential organ failure assessment scores. Postguideline, fewer patients were initiated on vasopressin (305 [53.2%] vs 217 [37.7%], absolute difference -15.5% [95% CI -21.2% to -9.8%]), and the norepinephrine dose at vasopressin initiation was higher (median 25 [interquartile range 18, 40] µg/min vs 40 [22, 52] µg/min; median difference 15 [95% CI 11 to 19] µg/min; P < 0.01). After guideline implementation, there was no evidence for a difference in ICU mortality rate slope (slope change 0.07% [95% CI -0.8% to 1.0%] per month; P 0.87), but the vasoactive cost level decreased by US$183 (95% CI -US$327 to -US$39) per patient immediately after implementation. Conclusion and Relevance: Implementation of a guideline suggesting a high norepinephrine dose threshold for vasopressin initiation and early vasopressin cessation in patients with septic shock appears to be safe and may decrease vasoactive costs.

Effectiveness, Safety, and Economic Comparison of Inhaled Epoprostenol Brands, Flolan and Veletri, in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

Background: No previous studies exist examining 2 inhaled epoprostenol formulations in an acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) patient population. Objective: The study aim was to evaluate a formulary conversion from inhaled Flolan to Veletri to determine the impact on effectiveness, safety, and cost in patients with ARDS. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective, matched cohort observational study at a tertiary care academic medical center. Patients included were mechanically ventilated, adult patients with ARDS receiving inhaled Flolan or Veletri for ≥1 hour in the intensive care unit. Results: A total of 132 patients were included in the matched cohort. There was no difference detected in change in partial pressure of arterial O2/fraction of inspired O2 (PaO2/FiO2) ratio after 1 hour of therapy between the inhaled Flolan and Veletri groups (27.2 ± 46.2 vs 30 ± 68 mm Hg, P = 0.78). Significant differences in secondary outcomes included incidence of hypotension (83% vs 95.5%, P = 0.04) and thrombocytopenia (9.1% vs 29.5%, P < 0.01) in the inhaled Flolan and Veletri groups, respectively, with no difference in cost per duration of therapy (P = 0.29). Conclusions and Relevance: There was no difference in the change in PaO2/FiO2 ratio after 1 hour of therapy between inhaled Flolan and Veletri in an ARDS patient population. The formulary conversion from inhaled Flolan to Veletri was likely justified.

Inpatient Initiation of Oral Treprostinil in an Academic Medical System.

PURPOSE: Clinicians may transition patients on parenteral or inhaled prostacyclins to oral treprostinil for ease of use or to avoid adverse effects related to parenteral therapy. However, few data are available to guide these transitions in inpatients. The purpose of this analysis is to describe the inpatient initiation of oral treprostinil at an academic medical system. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort analysis of patients newly initiated on oral treprostinil at Cleveland Clinic Heath System from 2015 to 2017. Demographic information regarding pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) history and previous PAH therapies were recorded. Outcomes evaluated included doses of oral treprostinil utilized, adverse effects related to therapy, and measures of clinical and functional status before and after the initiation of oral treprostinil. RESULTS: Overall, 29 patients were prescribed oral treprostinil, of which 15 patients were included in the analysis. Common reasons for initiation of oral treprostinil included disease progression (6, 40%) and patient desire (4, 25%). The median duration of transition/initiation of oral treprostinil was 4 days (range, 3-11 days). Median daily dose of oral treprostinil on day 1 of initiation was 2 mg (0.25-4 mg). By day 7, median daily dose was 15 mg (0.75-27.75 mg). Common adverse effects related to therapy were gastrointestinal (7, 47%) and headache (4, 27%). No patients required discontinuation of oral treprostinil due to adverse effects within 90 days of initiation. CONCLUSION: Inpatient initiation/transition to oral treprostinil was relatively well tolerated. Future studies should evaluate clinical outcomes surrounding the transitioning to oral treprostinil.

Corticosteroids for Septic Shock: Another Chapter in the Saga.

The use of corticosteroids in the management of septic shock has been a highly debated topic for quite some time. Corticosteroids have the ability to combat hyperinflammatory and exaggerated vasodilatory responses, as well as to sensitize adrenergic receptors to decrease the duration of shock. While helpful clinically, this has not translated to consistent mortality benefits. Conflicting results from 2 landmark trials published in 2002 and 2008 have led to varying clinical practices, and a clearly defined role of corticosteroids in septic shock is lacking. A decade later, an influx of new data derived from 2 more large trials continues to echo diverging viewpoints regarding patient mortality. In combination with fluctuating study designs (eg, adjunctive therapies and shock management) and patient populations (eg, illness severity), generalized conclusions are still difficult to draw. Despite these challenges, this review critically analyzes recently published data in the context of historical debate to provide an updated comment on the role of corticosteroids in septic shock. In summary, hydrocortisone therapy is likely to demonstrate maximal benefit when initiated on patients with septic shock and organ failure refractory to vasopressor therapy and should be used judiciously in other settings as it comes without a demonstrated benefit in mortality and increased potential for adverse effects.

Evaluation of Albumin 25% Use in Critically Ill Patients at a Tertiary Care Medical Center.

Background: Albumin 25% has been studied and has demonstrated benefit in a limited number of patient populations. The use of albumin 25% is associated with higher costs compared with crystalloid therapy. The aim of this study was to describe the prescribing practices of albumin 25% at a tertiary-care medical center and identify opportunities for restriction criteria related to its use to help generate cost savings. Methods: This evaluation was a retrospective, noninterventional, descriptive study of albumin 25% use between June 2015 and February 2016. Inclusion criteria consisted of patients ≥18 years old and who received at least one dose of albumin 25% while admitted to a Cleveland Clinic main campus intensive care unit (ICU). Inclusion was restricted to 150 randomly selected patients. Results: A total of 539 albumin 25% orders were placed for the 150 included patients. The cardiovascular ICU more frequently prescribed albumin 25% compared with the medical, surgical, neurosciences, and coronary ICUs (51% vs 23% vs 11% vs 9% vs 6%, respectively). Although the cardiovascular surgery ICU most frequently prescribed albumin 25% compared with other ICUs, the medical ICU prescribed a larger total quantity of albumin 25% compared with the cardiovascular, surgical, neurosciences, and coronary ICUs (8705 g vs 7275 g vs 3205 g vs 2162 g vs 625 g, respectively). The majority of patients (61%) did not have an indication listed for albumin 25% use and only 9% of patients were prescribed for indications supported by primary literature. Of the patients prescribed albumin for other indications not supported by primary literature (30%), the most common reasons for albumin 25% were hypotension, acute kidney injury, and volume resuscitation. The median cost per patient of albumin 25% was $417 with a total cost of $122 164 for the cohort. Only 19% of the total cost aligned with dosing regimens evaluated in primary literature. Conclusion: Prescribing patterns of albumin 25% at a tertiary academic medical center do not align with indications supported by primary literature. These findings identified a major opportunity for prescriber education and implementation of restriction criteria to target cost savings.

Inter-rater Agreement for Abstraction of the Early Management Bundle, Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock (SEP-1) Quality Measure in a Multi-Hospital Health System.

BACKGROUND: The Early Management Bundle, Severe Sepsis/Septic Shock (SEP-1) quality measure is complex to abstract, which may lead to discrepancies between abstractors. This study was designed to evaluate inter-rater agreement between abstractors at individual hospitals in a health system and a lead abstractor on abstraction elements and measure compliance for SEP-1. METHODS: Patient cases qualifying for abstraction for SEP-1 over a four-month period in 2016 were initially abstracted at a local hospital and then centrally by a lead abstractor. Abstraction results were retrospectively compared to determine inter-rater agreement. RESULTS: A total of 580 SEP-1 cases were abstracted locally and centrally. Each site contributed a median (interquartile range) of 63 (49, 86) cases. There was complete concordance of measure-related elements in 391 cases (67%) (inter-rater agreement: κ = 0.40, p < 0.01). The most common discrepancy (60 cases) was severe sepsis presentation time. There was a weak correlation between SEP-1 compliance adjudicated locally and centrally (r2 = 0.41, p < 0.01). The average change in monthly SEP-1 measure compliance at each site after central adjudication was a 1% increase but ranged from a 49% decrease to a 40% increase. CONCLUSIONS: Concordance on SEP-1 abstraction elements between local and expert adjudicators was fair, and SEP-1 performance varied considerably from initial site-reported performance. The detailed nature of SEP-1 can lead to unreliable abstraction, which may lead to inaccurate reporting of compliance with the measure and affect comparability of performance between hospitals. Abstraction by a dedicated team for SEP-1 can reduce variability and improve efficiency.

Frequency, Timing, and Types of Medication Ordering Errors Made by Residents in the Electronic Medical Records Era.

OBJECTIVES: To describe associations between resident level of training, timing of medication orders, and the types of inpatient medication ordering errors made by internal medicine residents. METHODS: This study reviewed all inpatient medication orders placed by internal medicine residents at a tertiary care academic medical center from July 2011 to June 2015. Medication order errors were measured by pharmacists' reporting of an error via the electronic medical record during real-time surveillance of orders. Multivariable regression models were constructed to assess associations between resident training level (postgraduate year [PGY]), medication order timing (time of day and month of year), and rates of medication ordering errors. RESULTS: Of 1,772,462 medication orders placed by 335 residents, 68,545 (3.9%) triggered a pharmacist intervention in the electronic medical record. Overall and for each PGY level, renal dose monitoring/adjustment was the most common order error (40%). Ordering errors were less frequent during the night and transition periods versus daytime (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91-0.96, and aOR 0.93, 95% CI 0.90-0.95, respectively). Errors were more common in July and August compared with other months (aOR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.09). Compared with PGY2 residents, both PGY1 (aOR 1.06, 95% CI 1.03-1.10), and PGY3 residents (aOR 1.07, 95% CI, 1.03-1.10) were more likely to make medication ordering errors. Throughout the course of the academic year, the odds of a medication ordering error decreased by 16% (aOR 0.84, 95% CI 0.80-0.89). CONCLUSIONS: Despite electronic medical records, medication ordering errors by trainees remain common. Additional supervision and resident education regarding medication orders may be necessary.

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.

OBJECTIVE: Numerous studies have evaluated the use of procalcitonin guidance during different phases of antibiotics management (initiation, cessation, or a combination of both) in patients admitted to ICUs. Several meta-analyses have attempted to generate an overall effect of procalcitonin-guidance on patient outcomes. However, combining studies from different phases of antibiotics management may not be appropriate due to the risk of clinical heterogeneity. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effect of procalcitonin-guided strategies in different phases of antibiotics use. DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception until November 1, 2017. STUDY SELECTION: We included randomized controlled trials that evaluated procalcitonin guidance compared with usual care for management of antibiotics in critically ill adult patients. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted study details, patient characteristics, procalcitonin algorithm, and outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 15 studies, from 1,624 abstracts identified based on our search strategy (three initiation, nine cessation, and three mixed). The pooled risk ratio for short-term mortality for the initiation, cessation, and mixed procalcitonin strategies were 1.00 (95% CI, 0.86-1.15,;p = 0.91), 0.87 (95% CI, 0.77-0.98; p = 0.02), and 1.01 (95% CI, 0.80-1.29; p = 0.93), respectively. Procalcitonin for cessation and mixed strategies was associated with decrease antibiotics duration (-1.26 d [p < 0.001] and -3.10 d [p =0.04], respectively). No differences were observed in other outcome measures. CONCLUSION: When evaluating all studies of procalcitonin-guided antibiotics management in critically ill patients, no difference in short-term mortality was observed. However, when only examining procalcitonin-guided cessation of antibiotics, lower mortality was detected. Future studies should focus specifically on procalcitonin for the cessation of antibiotics in critically ill patients.