No abstract

Background and PurposeThe Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2016 (J‐SSCG 2016), a Japanese‐specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in February 2017 in Japanese. An English‐language version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese‐language version.MethodsMembers of the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine were selected and organized into 19 committee members and 52 working group members. The guidelines were prepared in accordance with the Medical Information Network Distribution Service (Minds) creation procedures. The Academic Guidelines Promotion Team was organized to oversee and provide academic support to the respective activities allocated to each Guideline Creation Team. To improve quality assurance and workflow transparency, a mutual peer review system was established, and discussions within each team were open to the public. Public comments were collected once after the initial formulation of a clinical question (CQ), and twice during the review of the final draft. Recommendations were determined to have been adopted after obtaining support from a two‐thirds (>66.6%) majority vote of each of the 19 committee members.ResultsA total of 87 CQs were selected among 19 clinical areas, including pediatric topics and several other important areas not covered in the first edition of the Japanese guidelines (J‐SSCG 2012). The approval rate obtained through committee voting, in addition to ratings of the strengths of the recommendation and its supporting evidence were also added to each recommendation statement. We conducted meta‐analyses for 29 CQs. Thirty seven CQs contained recommendations in the form of an expert consensus due to insufficient evidence. No recommendations were provided for 5 CQs.ConclusionsBased on the evidence gathered, we were able to formulate Japanese‐specific clinical practice guidelines that are tailored to the Japanese context in a highly transparent manner. These guidelines can easily be used not only by specialists, but also by non‐specialists, general clinicians, nurses, pharmacists, clinical engineers, and other healthcare professionals.

IntroductionAbnormal body temperatures (Tb) are frequently seen in patients with severe sepsis. However, the relationship between Tb abnormalities and the severity of disease is not clear. This study investigated the impact of Tb on disease severity and outcomes in patients with severe sepsis.MethodsWe enrolled 624 patients with severe sepsis and grouped them into 6 categories according to their Tb at the time of enrollment. The temperature categories (≤35.5°C, 35.6–36.5°C, 36.6–37.5°C, 37.6–38.5°C, 38.6–39.5°C, ≥39.6°C) were based on the temperature data of the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) scoring. We compared patient characteristics, physiological data, and mortality between groups.ResultsPatients with Tb of ≤36.5°C had significantly worse sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) scores when compared with patients with Tb >37.5°C on the day of enrollment. Scores for APACHE II were also higher in patients with Tb ≤35.5°C when compared with patients with Tb >36.5°C. The 28-day and hospital mortality was significantly higher in patients with Tb ≤36.5°C. The difference in mortality rate was especially noticeable when patients with Tb ≤35.5°C were compared with patients who had Tb of >36.5°C. Although mortality did not relate to Tb ranges of ≥37.6°C as compared to reference range of 36.6–37.5°C, relative risk for 28-day mortality was significantly greater in patients with 35.6–36.5°C and ≤35.5°C (odds ratio; 2.032, 3.096, respectively). When patients were divided into groups based on the presence (≤36.5°C, n = 160) or absence (>36.5°C, n = 464) of hypothermia, disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) as well as SOFA and APACHE II scores were significantly higher in patients with hypothermia. Patients with hypothermia had significantly higher 28-day and hospital mortality rates than those without hypothermia (38.1% vs. 17.9% and 49.4% vs. 22.6%, respectively). The presence of hypothermia was an independent predictor of 28-day mortality, and the differences between patients with and without hypothermia were observed irrespective of the presence of septic shock.ConclusionsIn patients with severe sepsis, hypothermia (Tb ≤36.5°C) was associated with increased mortality and organ failure, irrespective of the presence of septic shock.Trial registrationUMIN-CTR ID UMIN000008195

IntroductionTo validate the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine (JAAM) disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) scoring system in patients with severe sepsis, we conducted a multicenter, prospective study at 15 critical care centers in tertiary care hospitals.MethodsThis study included 624 severe sepsis patients. JAAM DIC was scored on the day of diagnosis of severe sepsis (day 1) and day 4. Scores for disease severity and organ dysfunction were also evaluated.ResultsThe prevalence of JAAM DIC was 46.8% (292/624), and 21% of the DIC patients were scored according to the reduction rate of platelets. The JAAM DIC patients were more seriously ill and exhibited more severe systemic inflammation, a higher prevalence of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (MODS) and worse outcomes than the non-DIC patients. Disease severity, systemic inflammation, MODS and the mortality rate worsened in accordance with an increased JAAM DIC score on day 1. The Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated lower 1-year survival in the JAAM DIC patients than in those without DIC (log-rank test P <0.001). The JAAM DIC score on day 1 (odds ratio = 1.282, P <0.001) and the Delta JAAM DIC score (odds ratio = 0.770, P <0.001) were independent predictors of 28-day death. Dynamic changes in the JAAM DIC score from days 1 to 4 also affected prognoses. The JAAM DIC scoring system included all patients who met the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis overt DIC criteria on day 1. The International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis scoring system missed a large number of nonsurvivors recognized by the JAAM scoring system.ConclusionsThe JAAM DIC scoring system exhibits good prognostic value in predicting MODS and poor prognosis in patients with severe sepsis and can detect more patients requiring treatment. Conducting repeated daily JAAM scoring increases the ability to predict the patient's prognosis.

No abstract