{"title":"脓毒症的进展,从生理性全身炎症反应到免疫失调,由于危及生命的感染","authors":"Nicholas J Daering, M. Al-Hasan","doi":"10.37349/ei.2022.00075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sepsis was defined in 1991 by the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria which consisted mostly of physiologic responses to infection or inflammation (fever, tachycardia, tachypnea, and leukocytosis). These criteria were initially proposed to identify patients with gram-negative bloodstream infection (BSI). However, most patients with BSI are not critically ill at initial presentation using objective clinical scores for acute severity of illness, such as the Pitt bacteremia score (PBS). Lack of specificity and low positive predictive value (PPV) are other pitfalls of the SIRS criteria. Moreover, the implementation of sepsis interventions based on this outdated definition failed to improve patients’ outcomes and in some settings was associated with increased use of broad-spectrum antibiotics and Clostridioides difficile (C. difficile) infection. In 2016, sepsis was redefined as a dysregulatory host response to life-threatening infections using quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score. The presence of two of three bedside clinical variables (hypotension, respiratory distress, and altered mental status) that have consistently predicted mortality in patients with infections now constitutes sepsis. The scientific debate continues in the medical literature regarding the performance of the new criteria. Some medical professionals and quality organizations consider these changes to the sepsis definition too revolutionary and are resistant to altering existing medical practice. This narrative review presents infection as a continuum from localized to systemic infection (pre-sepsis) with the potential progression into sepsis and septic shock if appropriate antibiotic therapy and source control are delayed. The review assesses host and microbial factors that may influence the rate of progression through the sepsis cascade and proposes diagnostic considerations and management decisions at each step of the way. It emphasizes the need to utilize precision medicine concepts in selecting empirical antibiotic therapy based on patient-specific risk factors for infections due to resistant bacteria and potential benefits from appropriate therapy across the sepsis spectrum.","PeriodicalId":93552,"journal":{"name":"Exploration of immunology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The progression of sepsis from physiologic systemic inflammatory response to immune dysregulation due to life-threatening infections\",\"authors\":\"Nicholas J Daering, M. Al-Hasan\",\"doi\":\"10.37349/ei.2022.00075\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Sepsis was defined in 1991 by the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria which consisted mostly of physiologic responses to infection or inflammation (fever, tachycardia, tachypnea, and leukocytosis). These criteria were initially proposed to identify patients with gram-negative bloodstream infection (BSI). However, most patients with BSI are not critically ill at initial presentation using objective clinical scores for acute severity of illness, such as the Pitt bacteremia score (PBS). Lack of specificity and low positive predictive value (PPV) are other pitfalls of the SIRS criteria. Moreover, the implementation of sepsis interventions based on this outdated definition failed to improve patients’ outcomes and in some settings was associated with increased use of broad-spectrum antibiotics and Clostridioides difficile (C. difficile) infection. In 2016, sepsis was redefined as a dysregulatory host response to life-threatening infections using quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score. The presence of two of three bedside clinical variables (hypotension, respiratory distress, and altered mental status) that have consistently predicted mortality in patients with infections now constitutes sepsis. The scientific debate continues in the medical literature regarding the performance of the new criteria. Some medical professionals and quality organizations consider these changes to the sepsis definition too revolutionary and are resistant to altering existing medical practice. This narrative review presents infection as a continuum from localized to systemic infection (pre-sepsis) with the potential progression into sepsis and septic shock if appropriate antibiotic therapy and source control are delayed. The review assesses host and microbial factors that may influence the rate of progression through the sepsis cascade and proposes diagnostic considerations and management decisions at each step of the way. It emphasizes the need to utilize precision medicine concepts in selecting empirical antibiotic therapy based on patient-specific risk factors for infections due to resistant bacteria and potential benefits from appropriate therapy across the sepsis spectrum.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93552,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Exploration of immunology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Exploration of immunology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2022.00075\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Exploration of immunology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2022.00075","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The progression of sepsis from physiologic systemic inflammatory response to immune dysregulation due to life-threatening infections
Sepsis was defined in 1991 by the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria which consisted mostly of physiologic responses to infection or inflammation (fever, tachycardia, tachypnea, and leukocytosis). These criteria were initially proposed to identify patients with gram-negative bloodstream infection (BSI). However, most patients with BSI are not critically ill at initial presentation using objective clinical scores for acute severity of illness, such as the Pitt bacteremia score (PBS). Lack of specificity and low positive predictive value (PPV) are other pitfalls of the SIRS criteria. Moreover, the implementation of sepsis interventions based on this outdated definition failed to improve patients’ outcomes and in some settings was associated with increased use of broad-spectrum antibiotics and Clostridioides difficile (C. difficile) infection. In 2016, sepsis was redefined as a dysregulatory host response to life-threatening infections using quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) score. The presence of two of three bedside clinical variables (hypotension, respiratory distress, and altered mental status) that have consistently predicted mortality in patients with infections now constitutes sepsis. The scientific debate continues in the medical literature regarding the performance of the new criteria. Some medical professionals and quality organizations consider these changes to the sepsis definition too revolutionary and are resistant to altering existing medical practice. This narrative review presents infection as a continuum from localized to systemic infection (pre-sepsis) with the potential progression into sepsis and septic shock if appropriate antibiotic therapy and source control are delayed. The review assesses host and microbial factors that may influence the rate of progression through the sepsis cascade and proposes diagnostic considerations and management decisions at each step of the way. It emphasizes the need to utilize precision medicine concepts in selecting empirical antibiotic therapy based on patient-specific risk factors for infections due to resistant bacteria and potential benefits from appropriate therapy across the sepsis spectrum.