IntroductionEarly risk assessment is the mainstay of management of patients with sepsis. APACHE II is the gold standard prognostic stratification system. A prediction rule that aimed to improve prognostication by APACHE II with the application of serum suPAR (soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor) is developed.MethodsA prospective study cohort enrolled 1914 patients with sepsis including 62.2% with sepsis and 37.8% with severe sepsis/septic shock. Serum suPAR was measured in samples drawn after diagnosis by an enzyme-immunoabsorbent assay; in 367 patients sequential measurements were performed. After ROC analysis and multivariate logistic regression analysis a prediction rule for risk was developed. The rule was validated in a double-blind fashion by an independent confirmation cohort of 196 sepsis patients, predominantly severe sepsis/septic shock patients, from Sweden.ResultsSerum suPAR remained stable within survivors and non-survivors for 10 days. Regression analysis showed that APACHE II ≥17 and suPAR ≥12 ng/ml were independently associated with unfavorable outcome. Four strata of risk were identified: i) APACHE II <17 and suPAR <12 ng/ml with mortality 5.5%; ii) APACHE II < 17 and suPAR ≥12 ng/ml with mortality 17.4%; iii) APACHE II ≥ 17 and suPAR <12 ng/ml with mortality 37.4%; and iv) APACHE II ≥17 and suPAR ≥12 ng/ml with mortality 51.7%. This prediction rule was confirmed by the Swedish cohort.ConclusionsA novel prediction rule with four levels of risk in sepsis based on APACHE II score and serum suPAR is proposed. Prognostication by this rule is confirmed by an independent cohort.

Our analysis positively validated the use of SOFA score to predict unfavourable outcome and to limit misclassification into lower severity. However, qSOFA score had inadequate sensitivity for early risk assessment.

Supported by grants by the Hellenic Institute for the Study of Sepsis and by bioMérieux. Procalcitonin assays, material for detection of fecal colonization and laboratory training were provided by bioMérieux. Contribution of authors EJGB conceptualized the study design, participated in data analysis and drafting the manuscript, had full access to all of the study data and takes responsibility for their integrity and the accuracy of the analysis. EK participated in data analysis, drafted the manuscript, had full access to all of the study data and takes responsibility for their integrity and the accuracy of the analysis. MK performed data analysis and

BackgroundChoice of empirically prescribed antimicrobials for sepsis management depends on epidemiological factors. The epidemiology of sepsis in Greece was studied in two large-periods.MethodsSepsis due to bloodstream infections (BSI) from July 2006 until March 2013 was recorded in a multicenter study in 46 departments. Patients were divided into sepsis admitted in the emergencies and hospitalized in the general ward (GW) and sepsis developing after admission in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). The primary endpoints were the changes of epidemiology and the factors related with BSIs by multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens; the secondary endpoint was the impact of de-escalation on antimicrobial therapy.Results754 patients were studied; 378 from 2006–2009 and 376 from 2010–2013. Major differences were recorded between periods in the GW. They involved increase of: sepsis severity; the incidence of underlying diseases; the incidence of polymicrobial infections; the emergence of Klebsiella pneumoniae as a pathogen; and mortality. Factors independently related with BSI by MDR pathogens were chronic hemofiltration, intake of antibiotics the last three months and residence into long-term care facilities. De-escalation in BSIs by fully susceptible Gram-negatives did not affect final outcome. Similar epidemiological differences were not found in the ICU; MDR Gram-negatives predominated in both periods.ConclusionsThe epidemiology of sepsis in Greece differs in the GW and in the ICU. De-escalation in the GW is a safe strategy.

No abstract