Publications

14 Publications visible to you, out of a total of 14

Abstract (Expand)

BACKGROUND: CAP (Community acquired pneumonia) is frequent, with a high mortality rate and a high burden on health care systems. Development of predictive biomarkers, new therapeutic concepts, and epidemiologic research require a valid, reproducible, and quantitative measure describing CAP severity. METHODS: Using time series data of 1532 patients enrolled in the PROGRESS study, we compared putative measures of CAP severity for their utility as an operationalization. Comparison was based on ability to correctly identify patients with an objectively severe state of disease (death or need for intensive care with at least one of the following: substantial respiratory support, treatment with catecholamines, or dialysis). We considered IDSA/ATS minor criteria, CRB-65, CURB-65, Halm criteria, qSOFA, PSI, SCAP, SIRS-Score, SMART-COP, and SOFA. RESULTS: SOFA significantly outperformed other scores in correctly identifying a severe state of disease at the day of enrollment (AUC = 0.948), mainly caused by higher discriminative power at higher score values. Runners-up were the sum of IDSA/ATS minor criteria (AUC = 0.916) and SCAP (AUC = 0.868). SOFA performed similarly well on subsequent study days (all AUC > 0.9) and across age groups. In univariate and multivariate analysis, age, sex, and pack-years significantly contributed to higher SOFA values whereas antibiosis before hospitalization predicted lower SOFA. CONCLUSIONS: SOFA score can serve as an excellent operationalization of CAP severity and is proposed as endpoint for biomarker and therapeutic studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov NCT02782013 , May 25, 2016, retrospectively registered.

Authors: P. Ahnert, P. Creutz, K. Horn, F. Schwarzenberger, M. Kiehntopf, H. Hossain, M. Bauer, F. M. Brunkhorst, K. Reinhart, U. Volker, T. Chakraborty, M. Witzenrath, M. Loffler, N. Suttorp, M. Scholz

Date Published: 4th Apr 2019

Publication Type: Journal article

Human Diseases: pneumonia

Abstract (Expand)

PURPOSE Guidelines recommend administering antibiotics within 1 h of sepsis recognition but this recommendation remains untested by randomized trials. This trial was set up to investigate whetherr survival is improved by reducing the time before initiation of antimicrobial therapy by means of a multifaceted intervention in compliance with guideline recommendations. METHODS The MEDUSA study, a prospective multicenter cluster-randomized trial, was conducted from July 2011 to July 2013 in 40 German hospitals. Hospitals were randomly allocated to receive conventional continuous medical education (CME) measures (control group) or multifaceted interventions including local quality improvement teams, educational outreach, audit, feedback, and reminders. We included 4183 patients with severe sepsis or septic shock in an intention-to-treat analysis comparing the multifaceted intervention (n = 2596) with conventional CME (n = 1587). The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. RESULTS The 28-day mortality was 35.1% (883 of 2596 patients) in the intervention group and 26.7% (403 of 1587 patients; p = 0.01) in the control group. The intervention was not a risk factor for mortality, since this difference was present from the beginning of the study and remained unaffected by the intervention. Median time to antimicrobial therapy was 1.5 h (interquartile range 0.1-4.9 h) in the intervention group and 2.0 h (0.4-5.9 h; p = 0.41) in the control group. The risk of death increased by 2% per hour delay of antimicrobial therapy and 1% per hour delay of source control, independent of group assignment. CONCLUSIONS Delay in antimicrobial therapy and source control was associated with increased mortality but the multifaceted approach was unable to change time to antimicrobial therapy in this setting and did not affect survival.

Authors: Frank Bloos, Hendrik Rüddel, Daniel Thomas-Rüddel, Daniel Schwarzkopf, Christine Pausch, Stephan Harbarth, Torsten Schreiber, Matthias Gründling, John Marshall, Philipp Simon, Mitchell M. Levy, Manfred Weiss, Andreas Weyland, Herwig Gerlach, Tobias Schürholz, Christoph Engel, Claudia Matthäus-Krämer, Christian Scheer, Friedhelm Bach, Reimer Riessen, Bernhard Poidinger, Karin Dey, Norbert Weiler, Andreas Meier-Hellmann, Helene H. Häberle, Gabriele Wöbker, Udo X. Kaisers, Konrad Reinhart

Date Published: 1st Nov 2017

Publication Type: Journal article

Human Diseases: disease by infectious agent

Abstract (Expand)

Importance: Adjunctive hydrocortisone therapy is suggested by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign in refractory septic shock only. The efficacy of hydrocortisone in patients with severe sepsis without shock remains controversial. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone therapy in patients with severe sepsis prevents the development of septic shock. Design, Setting, and Participants: Double-blind, randomized clinical trial conducted from January 13, 2009, to August 27, 2013, with a follow-up of 180 days until February 23, 2014. The trial was performed in 34 intermediate or intensive care units of university and community hospitals in Germany, and it included 380 adult patients with severe sepsis who were not in septic shock. Interventions: Patients were randomly allocated 1:1 either to receive a continuous infusion of 200 mg of hydrocortisone for 5 days followed by dose tapering until day 11 (n = 190) or to receive placebo (n = 190). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was development of septic shock within 14 days. Secondary outcomes were time until septic shock, mortality in the intensive care unit or hospital, survival up to 180 days, and assessment of secondary infections, weaning failure, muscle weakness, and hyperglycemia (blood glucose level >150 mg/dL [to convert to millimoles per liter, multiply by 0.0555]). Results: The intention-to-treat population consisted of 353 patients (64.9% male; mean [SD] age, 65.0 [14.4] years). Septic shock occurred in 36 of 170 patients (21.2%) in the hydrocortisone group and 39 of 170 patients (22.9%) in the placebo group (difference, -1.8%; 95% CI, -10.7% to 7.2%; P = .70). No significant differences were observed between the hydrocortisone and placebo groups for time until septic shock; mortality in the intensive care unit or in the hospital; or mortality at 28 days (15 of 171 patients [8.8%] vs 14 of 170 patients [8.2%], respectively; difference, 0.5%; 95% CI, -5.6% to 6.7%; P = .86), 90 days (34 of 171 patients [19.9%] vs 28 of 168 patients [16.7%]; difference, 3.2%; 95% CI, -5.1% to 11.4%; P = .44), and 180 days (45 of 168 patients [26.8%] vs 37 of 167 patients [22.2%], respectively; difference, 4.6%; 95% CI, -4.6% to 13.7%; P = .32). In the hydrocortisone vs placebo groups, 21.5% vs 16.9% had secondary infections, 8.6% vs 8.5% had weaning failure, 30.7% vs 23.8% had muscle weakness, and 90.9% vs 81.5% had hyperglycemia. Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults with severe sepsis not in septic shock, use of hydrocortisone compared with placebo did not reduce the risk of septic shock within 14 days. These findings do not support the use of hydrocortisone in these patients. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00670254.

Authors: D. Keh, E. Trips, G. Marx, S. P. Wirtz, E. Abduljawwad, S. Bercker, H. Bogatsch, J. Briegel, C. Engel, H. Gerlach, A. Goldmann, S. O. Kuhn, L. Huter, A. Meier-Hellmann, A. Nierhaus, S. Kluge, J. Lehmke, M. Loeffler, M. Oppert, K. Resener, D. Schadler, T. Schuerholz, P. Simon, N. Weiler, A. Weyland, K. Reinhart, F. M. Brunkhorst

Date Published: 1st Nov 2016

Publication Type: Journal article

Human Diseases: disease by infectious agent

Abstract (Expand)

IMPORTANCE: High-dose intravenous administration of sodium selenite has been proposed to improve outcome in sepsis by attenuating oxidative stress. Procalcitonin-guided antimicrobial therapy may hasten the diagnosis of sepsis, but effect on outcome is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether high-dose intravenous sodium selenite treatment and procalcitonin-guided anti-infectious therapy in patients with severe sepsis affect mortality. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Placebo-Controlled Trial of Sodium Selenite and Procalcitonin Guided Antimicrobial Therapy in Severe Sepsis (SISPCT), a multicenter, randomized, clinical, 2 x 2 factorial trial performed in 33 intensive care units in Germany, was conducted from November 6, 2009, to June 6, 2013, including a 90-day follow-up period. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive an initial intravenous loading dose of sodium selenite, 1000 microg, followed by a continuous intravenous infusion of sodium selenite, 1000 microg, daily until discharge from the intensive care unit, but not longer than 21 days, or placebo. Patients also were randomized to receive anti-infectious therapy guided by a procalcitonin algorithm or without procalcitonin guidance. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was 28-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included 90-day all-cause mortality, intervention-free days, antimicrobial costs, antimicrobial-free days, and secondary infections. RESULTS: Of 8174 eligible patients, 1089 patients (13.3%) with severe sepsis or septic shock were included in an intention-to-treat analysis comparing sodium selenite (543 patients [49.9%]) with placebo (546 [50.1%]) and procalcitonin guidance (552 [50.7%]) vs no procalcitonin guidance (537 [49.3%]). The 28-day mortality rate was 28.3% (95% CI, 24.5%-32.3%) in the sodium selenite group and 25.5% (95% CI, 21.8%-29.4%) (P = .30) in the placebo group. There was no significant difference in 28-day mortality between patients assigned to procalcitonin guidance (25.6% [95% CI, 22.0%-29.5%]) vs no procalcitonin guidance (28.2% [95% CI, 24.4%-32.2%]) (P = .34). Procalcitonin guidance did not affect frequency of diagnostic or therapeutic procedures but did result in a 4.5% reduction of antimicrobial exposure. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Neither high-dose intravenous administration of sodium selenite nor anti-infectious therapy guided by a procalcitonin algorithm was associated with an improved outcome in patients with severe sepsis. These findings do not support administration of high-dose sodium selenite in these patients; the application of a procalcitonin-guided algorithm needs further evaluation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00832039.

Authors: F. Bloos, E. Trips, A. Nierhaus, J. Briegel, D. K. Heyland, U. Jaschinski, O. Moerer, A. Weyland, G. Marx, M. Grundling, S. Kluge, I. Kaufmann, K. Ott, M. Quintel, F. Jelschen, P. Meybohm, S. Rademacher, A. Meier-Hellmann, S. Utzolino, U. X. Kaisers, C. Putensen, G. Elke, M. Ragaller, H. Gerlach, K. Ludewig, M. Kiehntopf, H. Bogatsch, C. Engel, F. M. Brunkhorst, M. Loeffler, K. Reinhart

Date Published: 1st Sep 2016

Publication Type: Journal article

Human Diseases: disease by infectious agent

Abstract (Expand)

INTRODUCTION: Current sepsis guidelines recommend antimicrobial treatment (AT) within one hour after onset of sepsis-related organ dysfunction (OD) and surgical source control within 12 hours. The objective of this study was to explore the association between initial infection management according to sepsis treatment recommendations and patient outcome. METHODS: In a prospective observational multi-center cohort study in 44 German ICUs, we studied 1,011 patients with severe sepsis or septic shock regarding times to AT, source control, and adequacy of AT. Primary outcome was 28-day mortality. RESULTS: Median time to AT was 2.1 (IQR 0.8 - 6.0) hours and 3 hours (-0.1 - 13.7) to surgical source control. Only 370 (36.6%) patients received AT within one hour after OD in compliance with recommendation. Among 422 patients receiving surgical or interventional source control, those who received source control later than 6 hours after onset of OD had a significantly higher 28-day mortality than patients with earlier source control (42.9% versus 26.7%, P <0.001). Time to AT was significantly longer in ICU and hospital non-survivors; no linear relationship was found between time to AT and 28-day mortality. Regardless of timing, 28-day mortality rate was lower in patients with adequate than non-adequate AT (30.3% versus 40.9%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A delay in source control beyond 6 hours may have a major impact on patient mortality. Adequate AT is associated with improved patient outcome but compliance with guideline recommendation requires improvement. There was only indirect evidence about the impact of timing of AT on sepsis mortality.

Authors: F. Bloos, D. Thomas-Ruddel, H. Ruddel, C. Engel, D. Schwarzkopf, J. C. Marshall, S. Harbarth, P. Simon, R. Riessen, D. Keh, K. Dey, M. Weiss, S. Toussaint, D. Schadler, A. Weyland, M. Ragaller, K. Schwarzkopf, J. Eiche, G. Kuhnle, H. Hoyer, C. Hartog, U. Kaisers, K. Reinhart

Date Published: 3rd Mar 2014

Publication Type: Not specified

Human Diseases: bacterial infectious disease

Abstract (Expand)

INTRODUCTION: The optimal nutritional strategy remains controversial, particularly in severely septic patients. Our aim was to analyze the effect of three nutritional strategies--enteral (EN), parenteral (PN), and combined nutrition (EN+PN)--on the outcome of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This secondary analysis of the prospective, randomized-controlled, multicenter "Intensive Insulin Therapy and Pentastarch Resuscitation in Severe Sepsis (VISEP)" trial only included patients with a length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU) of more than 7 days. Besides patient characteristics, data on nutrition therapy were collected daily for up to 21 days. Morbidity as measured by the mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, incidence of secondary infections, renal replacement therapy, ventilator-free days and severe hypoglycemia, length of ICU stay, and mortality at 90 days were compared between the three nutritional strategies. RESULTS: In all, 353 patients were included in the analysis with the majority (68.5 %) receiving EN+PN, 24.4 % receiving EN, and only 7.1 % receiving PN. Median caloric intake was 918 kcal/day (EN), 1,210 kcal/day (PN), and 1,343 kcal/day (EN+PN; p < 0.001). In the latter group, calories were predominantly administered via the parenteral route within the first week. The rate of death at 90 days was lower with EN than with EN+PN (26.7 % vs. 41.3 %, p = 0.048), as was the rate of secondary infections, renal replacement therapy, and duration of mechanical ventilation. In the adjusted Cox regression analysis, the effect on mortality [hazard ratio (HR)= 1.86, 95 % confidence interval (CI): 1.16-2.98, p = 0.010] and the rate of secondary infections (HR= 1.89, 95 % CI: 1.27-2.81, p = 0.002) remained different between EN and EN+PN. CONCLUSION: In patients with severe sepsis or septic shock and prolonged ICU stay, EN alone was associated with improved clinical outcome compared to EN+PN. This hypothesis-generating result has to be confirmed by a randomized-controlled trial in this specific patient population.

Authors: G. Elke, E. Kuhnt, M. Ragaller, D. Schadler, I. Frerichs, F. M. Brunkhorst, M. Loffler, K. Reinhart, N. Weiler

Date Published: 5th Mar 2013

Publication Type: Not specified

Human Diseases: disease by infectious agent

Abstract (Expand)

CONTEXT: Early appropriate antimicrobial therapy leads to lower mortality rates associated with severe sepsis. The role of empirical combination therapy comprising at least 2 antibiotics of different mechanisms remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of moxifloxacin and meropenem with the effect of meropenem alone on sepsis-related organ dysfunction. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: A randomized, open-label, parallel-group trial of 600 patients who fulfilled criteria for severe sepsis or septic shock (n = 298 for monotherapy and n = 302 for combination therapy). The trial was performed at 44 intensive care units in Germany from October 16, 2007, to March 23, 2010. The number of evaluable patients was 273 in the monotherapy group and 278 in the combination therapy group. INTERVENTIONS: Intravenous meropenem (1 g every 8 hours) and moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 hours) or meropenem alone. The intervention was recommended for 7 days and up to a maximum of 14 days after randomization or until discharge from the intensive care unit or death, whichever occurred first. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Degree of organ failure (mean of daily total Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA] scores over 14 days; score range: 0-24 points with higher scores indicating worse organ failure); secondary outcome: 28-day and 90-day all-cause mortality. Survivors were followed up for 90 days. RESULTS: Among 551 evaluable patients, there was no statistically significant difference in mean SOFA score between the meropenem and moxifloxacin group (8.3 points; 95% CI, 7.8-8.8 points) and the meropenem alone group (7.9 points; 95% CI, 7.5-8.4 points) (P = .36). The rates for 28-day and 90-day mortality also were not statistically significantly different. By day 28, there were 66 deaths (23.9%; 95% CI, 19.0%-29.4%) in the combination therapy group compared with 59 deaths (21.9%; 95% CI, 17.1%-27.4%) in the monotherapy group (P = .58). By day 90, there were 96 deaths (35.3%; 95% CI, 29.6%-41.3%) in the combination therapy group compared with 84 deaths (32.1%; 95% CI, 26.5%-38.1%) in the monotherapy group (P = .43). CONCLUSION: Among adult patients with severe sepsis, treatment with combined meropenem and moxifloxacin compared with meropenem alone did not result in less organ failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00534287.

Authors: F. M. Brunkhorst, M. Oppert, G. Marx, F. Bloos, K. Ludewig, C. Putensen, A. Nierhaus, U. Jaschinski, A. Meier-Hellmann, A. Weyland, M. Grundling, O. Moerer, R. Riessen, A. Seibel, M. Ragaller, M. W. Buchler, S. John, F. Bach, C. Spies, L. Reill, H. Fritz, M. Kiehntopf, E. Kuhnt, H. Bogatsch, C. Engel, M. Loeffler, M. H. Kollef, K. Reinhart, T. Welte

Date Published: 13th Jun 2012

Publication Type: Not specified

Human Diseases: bacterial infectious disease

Powered by
(v.1.13.0-master)
Copyright © 2008 - 2021 The University of Manchester and HITS gGmbH
Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology, University of Leipzig

By continuing to use this site you agree to the use of cookies