A multicentre prospective registry of one thousand sepsis patients admitted in Indian ICUs: (SEPSIS INDIA) study

IF 8.8 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Critical Care Pub Date : 2024-11-19 DOI:10.1186/s13054-024-05176-8
Subhash Todi, Yatin Mehta, Kapil Zirpe, Subhal Dixit, Atul P. Kulkarni, Sushma Gurav, Shweta Ram Chandankhede, Deepak Govil, Amitabha Saha, Arpit Kumar Saha, Sumalatha Arunachala, Kapil Borawake, Shilpushp Bhosale, Sumit Ray, Ruchi Gupta, Swarna Deepak Kuragayala, Srinivas Samavedam, Mehul Shah, Ashit Hegde, Palepu Gopal, Abdul Samad Ansari, Ajoy Krishna Sarkar, Rahul Pandit
{"title":"A multicentre prospective registry of one thousand sepsis patients admitted in Indian ICUs: (SEPSIS INDIA) study","authors":"Subhash Todi, Yatin Mehta, Kapil Zirpe, Subhal Dixit, Atul P. Kulkarni, Sushma Gurav, Shweta Ram Chandankhede, Deepak Govil, Amitabha Saha, Arpit Kumar Saha, Sumalatha Arunachala, Kapil Borawake, Shilpushp Bhosale, Sumit Ray, Ruchi Gupta, Swarna Deepak Kuragayala, Srinivas Samavedam, Mehul Shah, Ashit Hegde, Palepu Gopal, Abdul Samad Ansari, Ajoy Krishna Sarkar, Rahul Pandit","doi":"10.1186/s13054-024-05176-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sepsis is a global health problem with high morbidity and mortality. Low- and middle-income countries have a higher incidence and poorer outcome with sepsis. Large epidemiological studies in sepsis using Sepsis-3 criteria, addressing the process of care and deriving predictors of mortality are scarce in India. A multicentre, prospective sepsis registry was conducted using Sepsis 3 criteria of suspected or confirmed infection and SOFA score of 2 or more in 19 ICUs in India over a period of one year (August 2022–July 2023). All adult patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit who fulfilled the Sepsis 3 criteria for sepsis and septic shock were included. Patient infected with Covid 19 were excluded. Patients demographics, severity, admission details, initial resuscitation, laboratory and microbiological data and clinical outcome were recorded. Performance improvement programs as recommended by the Surviving Sepsis guideline were noted from the participating centers. Patients were followed till discharge or death while in hospital. Registry Data of 1172 patients with sepsis (including 500 patients with septic shock) were analysed. The average age of the study cohort was 65 years, and 61% were male. The average APACHE II and SOFA score was 21 and 6.7 respectively. The majority of patients had community-acquired infections, and lung infections were the most common source. Of all culture positive results, 65% were gram negative organism. Carbapenem-resistance was identified in 50% of the gram negative blood culture isolates. The predominant gram negative organisms were Klebsiella spp (25%), Escherechia coli (24%) and Acinetobacter Spp (11%). Tropical infections (Dengue, Malaria, Typhus) constituted minority (n = 32, 2.2%) of sepsis patients. The observed hospital mortality for the entire cohort (n = 1172) was 36.3%, for those without shock (n = 672) it was 25.6% and for those with shock (n = 500) it was 50.8%. The average length of ICU and hospital stay for the study cohort was 8.64 and 11.9 respectively. In multivariate analysis adequate source control, correct choice of empiric antibiotic and the use of intravenous thiamine were protective. The general demographics of the sepsis population in the Indian Sepsis Registry is comparable to Western population. The mortality of sepsis cohort was higher (36.3%) but septic shock mortality (50.8%) was comparable to Western reports. Gram negative infection was the predominant cause of sepsis with a high incidence of carbapenem resistance. Eschericia coli, Klebsiella Spp and Acinetobacter Spp were the predominant causative organism. Tropical infection constituted a minority of sepsis population with low hospital mortality. The SOFA score on admission was a comparatively better predictor of poor outcome. Sepsis secondary to nosocomial infections had the worst outcomes, while source control, correct empirical antibiotic selection, and intravenous thiamine were protective. CTRI Registration CTRI:2022/07/044516.","PeriodicalId":10811,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care","volume":"54 47 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-05176-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sepsis is a global health problem with high morbidity and mortality. Low- and middle-income countries have a higher incidence and poorer outcome with sepsis. Large epidemiological studies in sepsis using Sepsis-3 criteria, addressing the process of care and deriving predictors of mortality are scarce in India. A multicentre, prospective sepsis registry was conducted using Sepsis 3 criteria of suspected or confirmed infection and SOFA score of 2 or more in 19 ICUs in India over a period of one year (August 2022–July 2023). All adult patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit who fulfilled the Sepsis 3 criteria for sepsis and septic shock were included. Patient infected with Covid 19 were excluded. Patients demographics, severity, admission details, initial resuscitation, laboratory and microbiological data and clinical outcome were recorded. Performance improvement programs as recommended by the Surviving Sepsis guideline were noted from the participating centers. Patients were followed till discharge or death while in hospital. Registry Data of 1172 patients with sepsis (including 500 patients with septic shock) were analysed. The average age of the study cohort was 65 years, and 61% were male. The average APACHE II and SOFA score was 21 and 6.7 respectively. The majority of patients had community-acquired infections, and lung infections were the most common source. Of all culture positive results, 65% were gram negative organism. Carbapenem-resistance was identified in 50% of the gram negative blood culture isolates. The predominant gram negative organisms were Klebsiella spp (25%), Escherechia coli (24%) and Acinetobacter Spp (11%). Tropical infections (Dengue, Malaria, Typhus) constituted minority (n = 32, 2.2%) of sepsis patients. The observed hospital mortality for the entire cohort (n = 1172) was 36.3%, for those without shock (n = 672) it was 25.6% and for those with shock (n = 500) it was 50.8%. The average length of ICU and hospital stay for the study cohort was 8.64 and 11.9 respectively. In multivariate analysis adequate source control, correct choice of empiric antibiotic and the use of intravenous thiamine were protective. The general demographics of the sepsis population in the Indian Sepsis Registry is comparable to Western population. The mortality of sepsis cohort was higher (36.3%) but septic shock mortality (50.8%) was comparable to Western reports. Gram negative infection was the predominant cause of sepsis with a high incidence of carbapenem resistance. Eschericia coli, Klebsiella Spp and Acinetobacter Spp were the predominant causative organism. Tropical infection constituted a minority of sepsis population with low hospital mortality. The SOFA score on admission was a comparatively better predictor of poor outcome. Sepsis secondary to nosocomial infections had the worst outcomes, while source control, correct empirical antibiotic selection, and intravenous thiamine were protective. CTRI Registration CTRI:2022/07/044516.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对印度重症监护室收治的一千名败血症患者进行多中心前瞻性登记:(SEPSIS INDIA)研究
败血症是一个全球性的健康问题,发病率和死亡率都很高。中低收入国家的败血症发病率较高,治疗效果较差。在印度,使用败血症-3 标准对败血症进行的大型流行病学研究很少,这些研究涉及护理过程和死亡率预测因素。在为期一年(2022 年 8 月至 2023 年 7 月)的时间里,我们在印度的 19 个重症监护病房采用败血症 3 标准进行了一项多中心、前瞻性的败血症登记。所有入住重症监护病房、符合败血症 3 标准的败血症和脓毒性休克成人患者均被纳入其中。不包括感染 Covid 19 的患者。记录患者的人口统计学特征、严重程度、入院详情、初始复苏、实验室和微生物学数据以及临床结果。参与研究的中心还记录了 "脓毒症生存指南 "推荐的绩效改进计划。对患者进行随访,直至出院或住院期间死亡。对 1172 名败血症患者(包括 500 名脓毒性休克患者)的登记数据进行了分析。研究对象的平均年龄为 65 岁,61% 为男性。APACHE II 和 SOFA 平均得分分别为 21 分和 6.7 分。大多数患者为社区获得性感染,肺部感染是最常见的感染源。在所有培养阳性结果中,65%为革兰氏阴性菌。在 50%的革兰氏阴性血液培养分离物中发现了对碳青霉烯类耐药性。主要的革兰氏阴性菌是克雷伯氏菌(25%)、大肠埃希氏菌(24%)和醋酸杆菌(11%)。热带感染(登革热、疟疾、斑疹伤寒)在败血症患者中占少数(32 人,2.2%)。整个组群(n = 1172)的住院死亡率为 36.3%,无休克者(n = 672)的住院死亡率为 25.6%,休克者(n = 500)的住院死亡率为 50.8%。研究对象在重症监护室和医院的平均住院时间分别为 8.64 天和 11.9 天。在多变量分析中,充分的病源控制、正确选择经验性抗生素和静脉注射硫胺素对患者具有保护作用。印度脓毒症登记处的脓毒症患者的一般人口统计学特征与西方人群相似。脓毒症患者的死亡率较高(36.3%),但脓毒性休克死亡率(50.8%)与西方报告相当。革兰氏阴性菌感染是败血症的主要病因,对碳青霉烯类耐药的发生率很高。大肠埃希氏菌、克雷伯氏菌属和醋杆菌属是主要的致病菌。热带感染在败血症患者中占少数,住院死亡率较低。入院时的 SOFA 评分是预测不良预后的较好指标。继发于医院内感染的败血症预后最差,而源头控制、正确的经验性抗生素选择和静脉注射硫胺素则具有保护作用。CTRI注册号CTRI:2022/07/044516。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Critical Care
Critical Care 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
20.60
自引率
3.30%
发文量
348
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: Critical Care is an esteemed international medical journal that undergoes a rigorous peer-review process to maintain its high quality standards. Its primary objective is to enhance the healthcare services offered to critically ill patients. To achieve this, the journal focuses on gathering, exchanging, disseminating, and endorsing evidence-based information that is highly relevant to intensivists. By doing so, Critical Care seeks to provide a thorough and inclusive examination of the intensive care field.
期刊最新文献
D-PRISM: a global survey-based study to assess diagnostic and treatment approaches in pneumonia managed in intensive care Evaluation of severe rhabdomyolysis on day 30 mortality in trauma patients admitted to intensive care: a propensity score analysis of the Traumabase registry Do prolonged infusions of β-lactam antibiotics improve outcomes in critically ill patients with sepsis? It is time to say yes New definition of AKI: shifting the focus beyond mortality Three-year mortality of ICU survivors with sepsis, an infection or an inflammatory illness: an individually matched cohort study of ICU patients in the Netherlands from 2007 to 2019
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1