Massimo Girardis, Irene Coloretti, Massimo Antonelli, Giorgio Berlot, Stefano Busani, Andrea Cortegiani, Gennaro De Pascale, Francesco Giuseppe De Rosa, Silvia De Rosa, Katia Donadello, Abele Donati, Francesco Forfori, Maddalena Giannella, Giacomo Grasselli, Giorgia Montrucchio, Alessandra Oliva, Daniela Pasero, Ornella Piazza, Stefano Romagnoli, Carlo Tascini, Bruno Viaggi, Mario Tumbarello, Pierluigi Viale
{"title":"Adjunctive immunotherapeutic agents in patients with sepsis and septic shock: a multidisciplinary consensus of 23.","authors":"Massimo Girardis, Irene Coloretti, Massimo Antonelli, Giorgio Berlot, Stefano Busani, Andrea Cortegiani, Gennaro De Pascale, Francesco Giuseppe De Rosa, Silvia De Rosa, Katia Donadello, Abele Donati, Francesco Forfori, Maddalena Giannella, Giacomo Grasselli, Giorgia Montrucchio, Alessandra Oliva, Daniela Pasero, Ornella Piazza, Stefano Romagnoli, Carlo Tascini, Bruno Viaggi, Mario Tumbarello, Pierluigi Viale","doi":"10.1186/s44158-024-00165-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the last decades, several adjunctive treatments have been proposed to reduce mortality in septic shock patients. Unfortunately, mortality due to sepsis and septic shock remains elevated and NO trials evaluating adjunctive therapies were able to demonstrate any clear benefit. In light of the lack of evidence and conflicting results from previous studies, in this multidisciplinary consensus, the authors considered the rational, recent investigations and potential clinical benefits of targeted adjunctive therapies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A panel of multidisciplinary experts defined clinical phenotypes, treatments and outcomes of greater interest in the field of adjunctive therapies for sepsis and septic shock. After an extensive systematic literature review, the appropriateness of each treatment for each clinical phenotype was determined using the modified RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The consensus identified two distinct clinical phenotypes: patients with overwhelming shock and patients with immune paralysis. Six different adjunctive treatments were considered the most frequently used and promising: (i) corticosteroids, (ii) blood purification, (iii) immunoglobulins, (iv) granulocyte/monocyte colony-stimulating factor and (v) specific immune therapy (i.e. interferon-gamma, IL7 and AntiPD1). Agreement was achieved in 70% of the 25 clinical questions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although clinical evidence is lacking, adjunctive therapies are often employed in the treatment of sepsis. To address this gap in knowledge, a panel of national experts has provided a structured consensus on the appropriate use of these treatments in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":73597,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)","volume":"4 1","pages":"28"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11059820/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anesthesia, Analgesia and Critical Care (Online)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s44158-024-00165-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: In the last decades, several adjunctive treatments have been proposed to reduce mortality in septic shock patients. Unfortunately, mortality due to sepsis and septic shock remains elevated and NO trials evaluating adjunctive therapies were able to demonstrate any clear benefit. In light of the lack of evidence and conflicting results from previous studies, in this multidisciplinary consensus, the authors considered the rational, recent investigations and potential clinical benefits of targeted adjunctive therapies.
Methods: A panel of multidisciplinary experts defined clinical phenotypes, treatments and outcomes of greater interest in the field of adjunctive therapies for sepsis and septic shock. After an extensive systematic literature review, the appropriateness of each treatment for each clinical phenotype was determined using the modified RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.
Results: The consensus identified two distinct clinical phenotypes: patients with overwhelming shock and patients with immune paralysis. Six different adjunctive treatments were considered the most frequently used and promising: (i) corticosteroids, (ii) blood purification, (iii) immunoglobulins, (iv) granulocyte/monocyte colony-stimulating factor and (v) specific immune therapy (i.e. interferon-gamma, IL7 and AntiPD1). Agreement was achieved in 70% of the 25 clinical questions.
Conclusions: Although clinical evidence is lacking, adjunctive therapies are often employed in the treatment of sepsis. To address this gap in knowledge, a panel of national experts has provided a structured consensus on the appropriate use of these treatments in clinical practice.