The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Fluid Resuscitation and Vasopressor Therapy Research Priorities in Adult Patients

Lat, Ishaq; Coopersmith, Craig M.; Backer, Daniel De; Manhasset, NY; Consultant, S. G. Bateman; Barcelona, Spain; Francisco, CA San; Pune, India; Chicago, IL; Paulo, Brazil Sao; Ga, Atlanta; Dublin, Ireland; York, NY New; Consultant, London

doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000004864

Cited by 33 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…An initial 88 questions were reduced to 22 final clinical questions. Subcommittees were tasked with elaborating on their initial contributions, and are previously published [3,4]. Another document specifically addresses research priorities for Coronavirus Disease 2019 [5].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: research priorities for the administration, epidemiology, scoring and identification of sepsis

Nunnally

Ferrer

Martin

et al. 2021

ICMx

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To identify priorities for administrative, epidemiologic and diagnostic research in sepsis. Design As a follow-up to a previous consensus statement about sepsis research, members of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Research Committee, representing the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Society of Critical Care Medicine addressed six questions regarding care delivery, epidemiology, organ dysfunction, screening, identification of septic shock, and information that can predict outcomes in sepsis. Methods Six questions from the Scoring/Identification and Administration sections of the original Research Priorities publication were explored in greater detail to better examine the knowledge gaps and rationales for questions that were previously identified through a consensus process. Results The document provides a framework for priorities in research to address the following questions: (1) What is the optimal model of delivering sepsis care?; (2) What is the epidemiology of sepsis susceptibility and response to treatment?; (3) What information identifies organ dysfunction?; (4) How can we screen for sepsis in various settings?; (5) How do we identify septic shock?; and (6) What in-hospital clinical information is associated with important outcomes in patients with sepsis? Conclusions There is substantial knowledge of sepsis epidemiology and ways to identify and treat sepsis patients, but many gaps remain. Areas of uncertainty identified in this manuscript can help prioritize initiatives to improve an understanding of individual patient and demographic heterogeneity with sepsis and septic shock, biomarkers and accurate patient identification, organ dysfunction, and ways to improve sepsis care.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: research priorities for the administration, epidemiology, scoring and identification of sepsis

Nunnally

Ferrer

Martin

et al. 2021

ICMx

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One big change was the replacement of normal saline solution with lactated Ringer’s solution in the sepsis care bundle. 9 Those who had not changed practice (and felt vindicated by the BaSICS results) pointed to a number of factors from the SMART and SALT-ED trials, such as the cluster-randomized design, the small amount of fluid administered, and the outcome being driven by a change in creatinine rather than a hard endpoint like death or dialysis. Additionally, the cost of balanced solutions came up, as lactated Ringer’s solution has been reported to cost $2.50 more than saline solution.…”

Section: The Basics Trialmentioning

confidence: 99%

Balanced Solutions Versus Saline to Reduce AKI: A #NephJC Editorial on the BaSICS Trial

Shankar

Trinidad²,

Tannor

et al. 2022

Kidney Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Bei kardiochirurgischen Patienten konnte gezeigt werden, dass nicht nur eine erniedrigte S zv O 2 bei Aufnahme auf die Intensivstation mit einem schlechteren Outcome assoziiert ist, sondern ebenso hohe Werte der S zv O 2 [20]. Dennoch ist ein Zielwert der S zv O 2 > 70 % entsprechend internationalen Empfehlungen bei septischen Patienten anzustreben [21].…”

Section: Zentralvenöse Sauerstoffsättigungunclassified

Hämodynamisches Monitoring auf der Intensivstation: Je invasiver, desto besser?

Renner¹,

Bein²,

Grünewald³

2022

Anästhesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Die jüngsten Entwicklungen im Bereich minimalinvasiver und nichtinvasiver hämodynamischer Monitoringverfahren mögen deren Einsatz im operativen wie im intensivmedizinischen Bereich fördern. Diese Übersicht beurteilt den Stellenwert invasiver und weniger invasiver Monitoringverfahren und deren spezifische hämodynamische Variablen in der Anwendung bei kritisch kranken Patienten im intensivmedizinischen Bereich.

show abstract

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: Fluid Resuscitation and Vasopressor Therapy Research Priorities in Adult Patients

Cited by 33 publications

References 77 publications

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: research priorities for the administration, epidemiology, scoring and identification of sepsis

The Surviving Sepsis Campaign: research priorities for the administration, epidemiology, scoring and identification of sepsis

Balanced Solutions Versus Saline to Reduce AKI: A #NephJC Editorial on the BaSICS Trial

Hämodynamisches Monitoring auf der Intensivstation: Je invasiver, desto besser?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About