Objective To provide an update to “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012”. Design A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. Methods The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable. Results The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions. Conclusions Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

Objective: To provide an update to “Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2012.” Design: A consensus committee of 55 international experts representing 25 international organizations was convened. Nominal groups were assembled at key international meetings (for those committee members attending the conference). A formal conflict-of-interest (COI) policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. A stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in December 2015. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee served as an integral part of the development. Methods: The panel consisted of five sections: hemodynamics, infection, adjunctive therapies, metabolic, and ventilation. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. Each subgroup generated a list of questions, searched for best available evidence, and then followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of evidence from high to very low, and to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or best practice statement when applicable. Results: The Surviving Sepsis Guideline panel provided 93 statements on early management and resuscitation of patients with sepsis or septic shock. Overall, 32 were strong recommendations, 39 were weak recommendations, and 18 were best-practice statements. No recommendation was provided for four questions. Conclusions: Substantial agreement exists among a large cohort of international experts regarding many strong recommendations for the best care of patients with sepsis. Although a significant number of aspects of care have relatively weak support, evidence-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the foundation of improved outcomes for these critically ill patients with high mortality.

Compelling evidence has shown that aggressive resuscitation bundles, adequate source control, appropriate antibiotic therapy, and organ support are cornerstone for the success in the treatment of patients with sepsis. Delay in the initiation of appropriate antibiotic therapy has been recognized as a risk factor for mortality. To perform a retrospective analysis on the Surviving Sepsis Campaign database to evaluate the relationship between timing of antibiotic administration and mortality. Retrospective analysis of a large dataset collected prospectively for the Surviving Sepsis Campaign. One hundred sixty-five ICUs in Europe, the United States, and South America. A total of 28,150 patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, from January 2005 through February 2010, were evaluated. Antibiotic administration and hospital mortality. A total of 17,990 patients received antibiotics after sepsis identification and were included in the analysis. In-hospital mortality was 29.7% for the cohort as a whole. There was a statically significant increase in the probability of death associated with the number of hours of delay for first antibiotic administration. Hospital mortality adjusted for severity (sepsis severity score), ICU admission source (emergency department, ward, vs ICU), and geographic region increased steadily after 1 hour of time to antibiotic administration. Results were similar in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, regardless of the number of organ failure. The results of the analysis of this large population of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock demonstrate that delay in first antibiotic administration was associated with increased in-hospital mortality. In addition, there was a linear increase in the risk of mortality for each hour delay in antibiotic administration. These results underscore the importance of early identification and treatment of septic patients in the hospital setting.

Sepsis is one of the most prevalent diseases and one of the main causes of death among hospitalized patients.¹ Severe sepsis accounts for 1 in 5 admissions to intensive care units (ICUs) and is a leading cause of death in noncardiac ICUs.^2,3 In Spain, the incidence of severe sepsis is 104 cases per 100 000 adult residents per year with a hospital mortality of 20.7%, and the incidence of septic shock is 31 cases per 100 000 adult residents per year with a mortality of 45.7%.⁴ In the United States, the incidence of severe sepsis is higher (300 cases per 100 000 population) as is the mortality rate (28.6%), which represents 215 000 deaths annually.¹

Rationale: Several Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines recommendations are reevaluated. Objectives: To analyze the effectiveness of treatments recommended in the sepsis guidelines. Methods: In a prospective observational study, we studied all adult patients with severe sepsis from 77 intensive care units. We recorded compliance with four therapeutic goals (central venous pressure 8 mm Hg or greater for persistent hypotension despite fluid resuscitation and/or lactate greater than 36 mg/dl, central venous oxygen saturation 70% or greater for persistent hypotension despite fluid resuscitation and/or lactate greater than 36 mg/dl, blood glucose greater than or equal to the lower limit of normal but less than 150 mg/dl, and inspiratory plateau pressure less than 30 cm H2O for mechanically ventilated patients) and four treatments (early broad-spectrum antibiotics, fluid challenge in the event of hypotension and/or lactate greater than 36 mg/dl, low-dose steroids for septic shock, drotrecogin alfa [activated] for multiorgan failure). The primary outcome measure was hospital mortality. The effectiveness of each treatment was estimated using propensity scores. Measurements and Main Results: Of 2,796 patients, 41.6% died before hospital discharge. Treatments associated with lower hospital mortality were early broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment (treatment within 1 hour vs. no treatment within first 6 hours of diagnosis; odds ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.50–0.90; P = 0.008) and drotrecogin alfa (activated) (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.41–0.84; P = 0.004). Fluid challenge and low-dose steroids showed no benefits. Conclusions: In severe sepsis, early administration of broad-spectrum antibiotics in all patients and administration of drotrecogin alfa (activated) in the most severe patients reduce mortality.