Physiologic parameters as biomarkers: what can we learn from physiologic variables and variation?

Sepsis generates an overwhelming host response characterized by changes in physiologic parameters. Monitoring these parameters can help identify and stratify septic patients. Recognizing sepsis early and identifying septic patients at risk of worsening are keys to successful treatment. Several studies have analyzed the independent physiologic parameters associated with the diagnosis of sepsis or bacteremia, with the development of severe sepsis or septic shock, and with mortality. Physiologic variability of heart rate and body temperature is reduced in sepsis and measuring the variability of these parameters can be useful for the diagnosis and prognosis of sepsis.     

Elevated nucleosome levels in systemic inflammation and sepsis

OBJECTIVE: Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome is a frequent complication of severe sepsis and septic shock and has a high mortality. We hypothesized that extensive apoptosis of cells might constitute the cellular basis for this complication. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Medical and surgical wards or intensive care units of two university hospitals. PATIENTS: Fourteen patients with fever, 15 with systemic inflammatory response syndrome, 32 with severe sepsis, and eight with septic shock. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We assessed circulating levels of nucleosomes, specific markers released by cells during the later stages of apoptosis, with a previously described enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in these 69 patients with fever, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, severe sepsis, or septic shock. Severity of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome was assessed with sepsis scores, and clinical and laboratory variables. Elevated nucleosome levels were found in 64%, 60%, 94%, and 100% of patients with fever, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, severe sepsis, or septic shock, respectively. These levels were significantly higher in patients with septic shock as compared with patients with severe sepsis, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, or fever, and in nonsurvivors as compared with survivors. In patients with advanced multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, nucleosome levels correlated with cytokine plasma levels as well as with variables predictive for outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe sepsis and septic shock have elevated plasma levels of nucleosomes. We suggest that apoptosis, probably resulting from exposure of cells to excessive amounts of inflammatory mediators, might by involved in the pathogenesis of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome.     

Current role of high dose vitamin C in sepsis management: A concise review

Sepsis and septic shock are common diagnoses for patients requiring intensive care unit admission and associated with high morbidity and mortality. In addition to aggressive fluid resuscitation and antibiotic therapy, several other drugs have been tried as adjuvant therapies to reduce the inflammatory response and improve outcomes. Vitamin C has been shown to have several biological actions, including anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects, which may prove beneficial in sepsis management. Initial trials showed improved patient outcomes when high dose vitamin C was used in combination with thiamine and hydrocortisone. These results, along with relative safety of high-dose (supra-physiological) vitamin C, encouraged physicians across the globe to add vitamin C as an adjuvant therapy in the management of sepsis. However, subsequent large-scale randomised control trials could not replicate these results, leaving the world divided regarding the role of vitamin C in sepsis management. Here, we discuss the rationale, safety profile, and the current clinical evidence for the use of high-dose vitamin C in the management of sepsis and septic shock.     

Immunological monitoring to prevent and treat sepsis

The clinical, human and economic burden associated with sepsis is huge. Initiatives such as the Surviving Sepsis Campaign aim to effectively reduce risk of death from severe sepsis and septic shock. Nonetheless, although substantial benefits raised from the implementation of this campaign have been obtained, much work remains if we are to realise the full potential promised by this strategy. A deeper understanding of the processes leading to sepsis is necessary before we can design an effective suite of interventions. Dysregulation of the immune response to infection is acknowledged to contribute to the pathogenesis of the disease. Production of both proinflammatory and immunosuppressive cytokines is observed from the very first hours following diagnosis. In addition, hypogammaglobulinemia is often present in patients with septic shock. Moreover, levels of IgG, IgM and IgA at diagnosis correlate directly with survival. In turn, nonsurvivors have lower levels of C4 (a protein of the complement system) than the survivors. Natural killer cell counts and function also seem to have an important role in this disease. HLA-DR in the surface of monocytes and counts of CD4⁺CD25⁺ T-regulatory cells in blood could also be useful biomarkers for sepsis. At the genomic level, repression of networks corresponding to major histocompatibility complex antigen presentation is observed in septic shock. In consequence, cumulative evidence supports the potential role of immunological monitoring to guide measures to prevent or treat sepsis in a personalised and timely manner (early antibiotic administration, immunoglobulin replacement, immunomodulation). In conclusion, although diffuse and limited, current available information supports the development of large comprehensive studies aimed to urgently evaluate immunological monitoring as a tool to prevent sepsis, guide its treatment and, as a consequence, diminish the morbidity and mortality associated with this severe condition.     

C1-inhibitor substitution therapy in septic shock and in the vascular leak syndrome induced by high doses of interleukin-2

C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) is the major plasma inhibitor of the complement and contact systems. Activation of either system has been shown to occur in patients with septic shock and is associated with a poor outcome. Functional levels of C1-INH tend to be normal in septic patients although paradoxically this inhibitor is an acute phase protein. Moreover, levels of proteolytically inactivated C1-INH are increased in sepsis pointing to an increased turn-over. These observations suggest a relative deficiency of biologically active C1-INH in sepsis. Complement and contact activation have also been shown to occur in the vascular leak syndrome (VLS) induced by immunotherapy with the cytokine interleukin-2 (IL-2), which syndrome may be regarded as a human model for septic shock. The similarity between VLS and sepsis encompasses more than complement and contact activation since a number of other inflammatory mediators considered to play a role in the pathogenesis of septic shock, are also involved in the development of VLS. The role and the mechanisms of complement and contact activation in sepsis and in the VLS are reviewed in this paper. Initial results of intervention therapy with high doses of C1-INH in these syndromes are also reported. It is concluded that high doses of C1-INH can be safely administered to patients with septic shock or with VLS and may attenuate complement and contact activation in these conditions. Double-blind controlled studies are needed to definitely prove these effects and to establish whether this treatment is able to reduce mortality and morbidity of these syndromes.     

C1-inhibitor substitution therapy in septic shock and in the vascular leak syndrome induced by high doses of interleukin-2

C1-inhibitor (C1-INH) is the major plasma inhibitor of the complement and contact systems. Activation of either system has been shown to occur in patients with septic shock and is associated with a poor outcome. Functional levels of C1-INH tend to be normal in septic patients although paradoxically this inhibitor is an acute phase protein. Moreover, levels of proteolytically inactivated C1-INH are increased in sepsis pointing to an increased turn-over. These observations suggest a relative deficiency of biologically active C1-INH in sepsis. Complement and contact activation have also been shown to occur in the vascular leak syndrome (VLS) induced by immunotherapy with the cytokine interleukin-2 (IL-2), which syndrome may be regarded as a human model for septic shock. The similarity between VLS and sepsis encompasses more than complement and contact activation since a number of other inflammatory mediators considered to play a role in the pathogenesis of septic shock, are also involved in the development of VLS. The role and the mechanisms of complement and contact activation in sepsis and in the VLS are reviewed in this paper. Initial results of intervention therapy with high doses of C1-INH in these syndromes are also reported. It is concluded that high doses of C1-INH can be safely administered to patients with septic shock or with VLS and may attenuate complement and contact activation in these conditions. Double-blind controlled studies are needed to definitely prove these effects and to establish whether this treatment is able to reduce mortality and morbidity of these syndromes.     

Organ-specific therapy in critical illness: Interfacing molecular mechanisms with physiological interventions

Sepsis and SIRS is the outward manifestation of a generalized uncontrolled inflammatory response, which, if sustained, induces widespread endothelial damage and MODS. Immunomodulating therapies, at present, have proven ineffective in reducing morbidity and mortality, presumably because of the heterogeneous nature of sepsis and septic shock and the reciprocating and redundant nature of this inflammatory cascade. Organ-specific therapies can support life but impair both organ-specific function and remote organ function. Novel therapies aimed at minimizing further organ dysfunction may improve outcome in a cost-effective fashion by preventing both further primary organ dysfunction or remote organ dysfunction secondary to the subsequent activation of the inflammatory response.     

Management of Septic Shock

Severe sepsis is a common disease process affecting some 2-11% of hospital admissions in the US. Severe sepsis and septic shock are associated with considerable morbidity and mortality, and account for a large part of intensive care unit costs. Until recently, the management of septic shock relied on the treatment of underlying infection with antimicrobial agents and surgical removal of any infectious source, and individual support of failing organs. However, in the last few years we have seen huge strides being made in our understanding of the pathophysiology of the sepsis response, and in our ability to manipulate that response. In the last couple of years these advances have come to fruition with the development of a drug, drotrecogin alfa, which specifically reduces mortality from this all too often fatal disease. While intensive early resuscitation remains the cornerstone of management, new approaches are beginning to form part of sepsis management protocols and will lead to improved outcomes for patients with this disease process.     

Management of septic shock

Severe sepsis is a common disease process affecting some 2-11% of hospital admissions in the US. Severe sepsis and septic shock are associated with considerable morbidity and mortality, and account for a large part of intensive care unit costs. Until recently, the management of septic shock relied on the treatment of underlying infection with antimicrobial agents and surgical removal of any infectious source, and individual support of failing organs. However, in the last few years we have seen huge strides being made in our understanding of the pathophysiology of the sepsis response, and in our ability to manipulate that response. In the last couple of years these advances have come to fruition with the development of a drug, drotrecogin alfa, which specifically reduces mortality from this all too often fatal disease. While intensive early resuscitation remains the cornerstone of management, new approaches are beginning to form part of sepsis management protocols and will lead to improved outcomes for patients with this disease process.     

Inflammatory response and immune regulation of high mobility group box-1 protein in treatment of sepsis

Sepsis is an infection induced systemic inflammatory response syndrome and is a major cause of morbidity as well as mortality in intensive care units. A growing body of evidence suggests that the activation of a proinflammatory cascade is responsible for the development of immune dysfunction, susceptibility to severe sepsis and septic shock. The present theories of sepsis as a dysregulated inflammatory response and immune function, as manifested by excessive release of inflammatory mediators such as high mobility group box 1 protein (HMGB1), are supported by increasing studies employing animal models and clinical observations of sepsis. HMGB1, originally described as a DNA-binding protein and released passively by necrotic cells and actively by macrophages/monocytes, has been discovered to be one of essential cytokines that mediates the response to infection, injury and inflammation. A growing number of studies still focus on the inflammation-regulatory function and its contribution to infectious and inflammatory disorders, recent data suggest that HMGB1 formation can also markedly influence the host cell-mediated immunity, including T lymphocytes and macrophages. Here we review emerging evidence that support extracellular HMGB1 as a late mediator of septic complications, and discuss the therapeutic potential of several HMGB1-targeting agents in experimental sepsis. In addition, with the development of traditional Chinese medicine in recent years, it has been proven that traditional Chinese herbal materials and their extracts have remarkable effective in treating severe sepsis. In this review, we therefore provide some new concepts of HMGB1-targeted Chinese herbal therapies in sepsis.KEY WORDS: Sepsis, Inflammatory mediators, High mobility group box 1 protein     

Afelimomab

Tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha) is well established as a key mediator in the inflammatory response seen in various disease processes including sepsis. TNF-alpha is involved in virtually all features of septic shock and multiple organ failure. Anti-TNF-alpha strategies are thus appealing and have been effective at reducing inflammation and morbidity in certain conditions including rheumatoid arthritis and Crohn's disease. Afelimomab is the F(ab')2 fragment of a murine anti-TNF-alpha antibody, and has been evaluated in clinical trials in septic patients. The results suggest that the drug is well tolerated, and may be of benefit in certain groups of patients with sepsis. A large, randomised, clinical trial of afelimomab in patients with severe sepsis has recently been completed and the results are eagerly awaited. More work is necessary to identify a means of selecting which patients are most likely to benefit from this type of therapy in sepsis.     

The epidemiology of the systemic inflammatory response

Objective: To examine the incidence, risk factors, aetiologies and outcome of the various forms of the septic syndromes (the systemic inflammatory response syndrome [SIRS] sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock) and their relationships with infection.¶Design: Review of published cohort studies examining the epidemiology of the septic syndromes, with emphasis on intensive care unit (ICU) patients.¶Results: The prevalence of SIRS is very high, affecting one-third of all in-hospital patients, and > 50 % of all ICU patients; in surgical ICU patients, SIRS occurs in > 80 % patients. Trauma patients are at particularly high risk of SIRS, and most these patients do not have infection documented. The prevalence of infection and bacteraemia increases with the number of SIRS criteria met, and with increasing severity of the septic syndromes. About one-third of patients with SIRS have or evolve to sepsis. Sepsis may occur in approximately 25 % of ICU patients, and bacteraemic sepsis in 10 %. In such patients, sepsis evolves to severe sepsis in > 50 % of cases, whereas evolution to severe sepsis in non-ICU patients is about 25 %. Severe sepsis and septic shock occur in 2 %–3 % of ward patients and 10 %–15 % or more ICU patients, depending on the case-mix; 25 % of patients with severe sepsis have shock. There is a graded severity from SIRS to sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock, with an associated 28-d mortality of approximately 10 %, 20 %, 20 %–40 %, and 40 %–60 %, respectively. Mortality rates are similar within each stage, whether infection is documented or not, and microbiological characteristics of infection do not substantially influence outcome, although the source of infection does. While about three of four deaths occur during the first months after sepsis, the septic syndromes significantly impact on long-term outcome, with an estimated 50 % reduction of life expectancy over the following five years. The major determinants of outcome, both short-term and long-term, of patients with sepsis are the severity of underlying diseases and comorbidities, the presence of shock and organ failures at onset of sepsis or evolving thereafter. It has been estimated that two-thirds of the overall mortality can be attributed to sepsis.¶Conclusions: The prevalence of sepsis in ICU patients is very high, and most patients have clinically or microbiologically documented infection, except in specific subset of patients. The prognosis of septic syndromes is related to underlying diseases and the severity of the inflammatory response and its sequelae, reflected in shock and organ dysfunction/failures.     

Clinical gram-positive sepsis: does it fundamentally differ from gram-negative bacterial sepsis?

OBJECTIVE: To review the basic differences between gram-positive and gram-negative sepsis and to assess the effect of these differences on current and future therapeutic strategies for sepsis. DESIGN: Literature review of the past 30 yrs of laboratory and clinical reports that analyze the microbial aspects of sepsis and the immunologic response to systemic infection. RESULTS: The increasing prevalence of sepsis from gram-positive bacterial pathogens necessitates reevaluation of many of the basic assumptions about the molecular pathogenesis of septic shock. It has been assumed that the initiation of the systemic inflammatory response with activation of the proinflammatory cytokine networks and other mediators results in a similar pathophysiologic process, regardless of the causative microbic pathogen. Yet, there is increasing experimental evidence that fundamental differences exist in the host response to gram-positive bacterial pathogens compared with the host response to gram-negative organisms. Systemic immune activation during sepsis may promote the clearance of the microbic pathogen; however, generalized inflammation also contributes to the pathogenesis of septic shock. The balance between these beneficial and deleterious effects may differ between gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens. CONCLUSIONS: Results of antimediator therapies in clinical trials in septic shock are inconclusive but suggest that the response may differ, depending on the type of microbic pathogen. The immune-mediated pathophysiologic mechanisms that underlie gram-positive sepsis and the potential interactions between the infecting microorganism and efficacy of anticytokine therapies require further investigation. Treatment strategies that explain the causative organism may be necessary for optimal use of immunoadjuvants in the future.     

Optimum treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock: evidence in support of the recommendations

Severe sepsis and septic shock are among the most common causes of death in noncoronary intensive care units. The incidence of sepsis has been increasing over the past two decades, and is predicted to continue to rise over the next 20 years. While our understanding of the complex pathophysiologic alterations that occur in severe sepsis and septic shock has increased greatly asa result of recent clinical and preclinical studies, mortality associated with the disorder remains unacceptably high. Despite these new insights, the cornerstone of therapy continues to be early recognition, prompt initiation of effective antibiotic therapy, and source control, and goal-directed hemodynamic, ventilatory,and metabolic support as necessary. To date, attempts to reduce mortality with innovative, predominantly anti-inflammatory therapeutic strategies have been extremely disappointing. Observations of improved outcomes with physiologic doses of corticosteroid replacement therapy and activated protein C (drotrecogin alfa[activated]) have provided new adjuvant therapies for severe sepsis and septic shock in selected patients. This article reviews the components of sepsis management and discusses the available evidence in support of these recommendations. In addition, there is a discussion of some promising new strategies.     

Novel relationships between oxidative stress and angiogenesis-related factors in sepsis: New biomarkers and therapies

Abstract

Sepsis is a systemic uncontrolled inflammatory response in the presence of an infection. It remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. According to its severity, sepsis can progress to three different states: severe sepsis, septic shock, and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, related to organ dysfunction and/or tissue hypoperfusion. Different processes underlie its pathophysiology; among them are oxidative stress, endothelial and mitochondrial dysfunction, and angiogenesis-related factors. However, no studies have integrated these elements in sepsis. The main difficulty in sepsis is its diagnosis. Currently, the potential of inflammatory biomarkers in septic patients remains weak. In this context, the research into new biomarkers is essential to aid with sepsis diagnosis and prognostication. Furthermore, even though the current management of severe forms of sepsis has been effective, morbimortality remains elevated. Therefore, it is essential to explore alternative approaches to therapy development. The aim of this review is to present an update of evidence supporting the role of oxidative stress and angiogenesis-related factors in the pathophysiology of the different forms of sepsis. It proposes a novel convergence between both elements in their role in the disease, and it will cover their utility as new diagnostic tools, predictors of outcome, and as novel therapeutic targets.     

Activated partial thromboplastin time waveform analysis: a new tool to detect infection?

OBJECTIVE: An abnormality of the optical transmission waveform obtained during measurement of the activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) has been described to identify a high-risk intensive care unit population consisting of patients with sepsis or with higher mortality rates than patients with normal aPTT waveforms. We investigated the abnormal aPTT biphasic waveform as a diagnostic and prognostic marker of infection. DESIGN: Prospective, observational study investigating the predictive value of aPTT waveform analysis for the diagnosis and prognosis of sepsis. SETTING: Surgical intensive care unit of a university hospital. PATIENTS: We studied 187 consecutive patients who fulfilled at least two or more criteria of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome at admission or during intensive care stay and classified as having systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis, severe sepsis, or septic shock during an 8-month period. INTERVENTIONS: Laboratory analyses including aPTT waveform analysis and procalcitonin and C-reactive protein concentrations were measured at days 1-3. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The final diagnoses were systemic inflammatory response syndrome in 49%, sepsis in 16%, severe sepsis in 12%, and septic shock in 23% of patients. On day 1, the biphasic waveform was significantly more abnormal in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock than in patients with systemic inflammatory response syndrome or sepsis. The biphasic waveform was more accurate than procalcitonin and C-reactive protein for differentiating patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, with 90% sensitivity and 92% negative predictive value. Biphasic waveform values were significantly more abnormal during days 1-3 in septic nonsurvivors than in survivors and nonseptic nonsurvivors. The biphasic waveform exhibited the best specificity (91%) and negative predictive value (98%) for the prognosis of sepsis-related mortality on day 3. CONCLUSIONS: In intensive care units, when the analyzer is available, aPTT waveform analysis is an inexpensive, rapid, effective, and readily available tool providing information for the diagnosis of severe sepsis and the prognosis of septic patients.     

Dysfonction myocardique et sepsis : physiopathologie et perspectives thérapeutiques

In the 40% of patients with sepsis who develop cardiovascular disturbances, mortality increases from 20 to 70–80%. These rates have changed little in recent years despite significant advances in the field of antimicrobial and intensive care therapies. Peripheral circulatory abnormalities usually observed in septic shock lead to difficulties in the demonstration of autonomous cardiac involvement, i.e., independent of loading conditions. Although exact mechanisms leading to myocardial dysfunction in sepsis are multiple and may involve several inflammatory mediators, the reality of this septic myocardial dysfunction is now firmly established on the basis of animal and clinical studies. Nitric oxide seems to play a pivotal role at the cellular level, being implicated in the transmission of different cytosolic signals leading to impaired contractile abnormalities. A better knowledge of the pathophysiology of this syndrome will improve the treatment modalities of septic cardiac dysfunction.     

Low-dose corticosteroids to treat septic shock: a critical literature review

Septic shock is the 13th leading cause of death in the United States. The rate of severe sepsis nearly doubled and mortality increased more than 60% during the 10-year period ending in 2003. Systemic inflammatory response syndrome has noninfectious and infectious causes. Noninfectious ones include burns, trauma, severe pancreatitis, and therapy with monoclonal antibodies or immunomodulatory drugs such as interleukin 2. Progression from sepsis syndrome to septic shock is caused by a series of immune responses. As an infectious injury progresses, host activation of the coagulation, immunological, and stress response systems ensues, resulting in tissue hypoperfusion and organ failure. Early studies with small numbers of patients suggest that treatment with low-dose corticosteroids has marked beneficial effects on shock reversal, the immune system, and the hemodynamic profile. Low-dose corticosteroids should only be administered to a subset of patients with septic shock who are unresponsive to fluid replacement and vasopressor therapy.