An innovative approach to meeting early goal-directed therapy using telemedicine

Severe sepsis and septic shock is a major health concern. A key component in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock is optimization of the septic patient's abnormal physiology. However, following the evidence based guidelines present many unique challenges. The article presents the challenges and how a 5 hospital system in San Antonio, Texas uses a telemedicine approach to help comply with the sepsis bundles. A multidisciplinary sepsis team meets regularly to assess compliance and review data. The processes and tools continue to be changed accordingly, to improve adherence to best evidence practice for the severe septic and septic shock patient.     

The impact of compliance with 6-hour and 24-hour sepsis bundles on hospital mortality in patients with severe sepsis: a prospective observational study

Introduction  

Compliance with the ventilator care bundle affects the rate of ventilator-associated pneumonia. It was not known, however, whether compliance with sepsis care bundles has an impact on outcome. The aims of the present study were to determine the rate of compliance with 6-hour and 24-hour sepsis bundles and to determine the impact of the compliance on hospital mortality in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock.     

Impact of Sepsis Bundle Strategy on Outcomes of Patients Suffering from Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock in China

Background

It is well known that poor sepsis outcomes are related to delays in diagnosis and treatment.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to compare the mortality rate between two groups of patients, one group presenting before and one group presenting after implementation of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) sepsis performance improvement bundles in the Emergency Department (ED).

Methods

This was a prospective study. The studied population included severe sepsis and septic shock patients entered in the SSC database who were admitted to the ED between June 2008 and December 2009. Patients were divided into two groups based on when they presented to the ED. Key treatment interventions, admission to the intensive care unit, and in-hospital mortality were compared. In addition, a survey was completed by the treating physicians to identify reasons for failures to comply with indicators.

Results

One hundred ninety-five (195) patients with severe sepsis and septic shock were enrolled in the study. Mortality was significantly higher at 44.8% in the baseline group (Group 1) compared to 31.6% in the group studied after the SSC protocol was instituted (Group 2) (p < 0.05). Compliance with all elements of the sepsis resuscitation bundle was 1% in Group 1 and 9% in Group 2 (p < 0.05). Compliance with all elements of the management bundle was 1% in Group 1 and 12.8% in Group 2. The most frequently reported reasons by physicians for failure to comply with the bundles were: “did not think it was needed” and “unsure of reason.”

Conclusion

The results revealed a significant drop in mortality after implementing the SSC protocol and sepsis performance improvement bundles in the ED. The barriers to implementing sepsis guidelines are knowledge, attitude, and behavioral barriers.     

A multicenter,prospective evaluation of quality of care and mortality in Japan based on the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines

To elucidate the standard Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines-based quality of care and mortality related to severe sepsis in Japan, we conducted a multicenter, prospective, observational study using a new web-based database between June 1, 2010, and December 31, 2011. A total of 1104 patients with severe sepsis were enrolled from 39 Japanese emergency and critical care centers. All-cause hospital mortality was 29.3% in patients with severe sepsis and 40.7% in patients with septic shock. Pulmonary, renal, hepatic, and hematological dysfunctions were associated with significantly higher mortality, and hematological dysfunction, especially coagulopathy, was associated with the highest odds ratio for mortality. Compliance with severe sepsis bundles in our study was generally low compared with that in a previous international sepsis registry study, and glycemic control was associated with lowest odds ratio for mortality. Despite higher complication rates of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome and low compliance with severe sepsis bundles on the whole, mortality in our study was similar to that in the international sepsis registry study. From these results, we concluded that our prospective multicenter study was successful in evaluating SSC guidelines-based standard quality of care and mortality related to severe sepsis in Japan. Although mortality in Japan was equivalent to that reported worldwide in the above-mentioned international sepsis registry study, compliance with severe sepsis bundles was low. Thus, there is scope for improvement in the initial treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock in Japanese emergency and critical care centers.     

Nursing Care of Oncology Patients with Sepsis

ObjectivesThis article aims to update nurses on the incidence, diagnosis, and treatment of neutropenic sepsis and septic shock.Data SourcesA search of electronic databases, including PubMed and CINAHL, and e-books was performed, as was a search of clinically focused and point-of-care resources from the National Cancer Institute and UpToDate until December 2020.ConclusionNeutropenic sepsis and septic shock are oncological emergencies and can be fatal for patients undergoing anticancer treatment. Prompt and targeted treatment based on clinical signs is necessary to minimize further sequela, including morbidity and mortality.Implications for Nursing PracticeThe oncology nurse must possess an understanding of the risk factors, presenting signs, and initial management of a neutropenic fever, sepsis, and septic shock. Early identification and initiation of treatments in patients in sepsis and septic shock will allow the oncology nurse to intervene with speed, skill, and confidence while working within the multidisciplinary team to provide the best outcome based on current evidence.     

Disease Progression in Hemodynamically Stable Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department With Sepsis

Background: Aggressive diagnosis and treatment of patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with septic shock has been shown to reduce mortality. To enhance the ability to intervene in patients with lesser illness severity, a better understanding of the natural history of the early progression from simple infection to more severe illness is needed. Objectives: The objectives were to 1) describe the clinical presentation of ED sepsis, including types of infection and causative microorganisms, and 2) determine the incidence, patient characteristics, and mortality associated with early progression to septic shock among ED patients with infection. Methods: This was a multicenter study of adult ED patients with sepsis but no evidence of shock. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify patient factors for early progression to shock and its association with 30‐day mortality. Results: Of 472 patients not in shock at ED presentation (systolic blood pressure > 90 mm Hg and lactate < 4 mmol/L), 84 (17.8%) progressed to shock within 72 hours. Independent factors associated with early progression to shock included older age, female sex, hyperthermia, anemia, comorbid lung disease, and vascular access device infection. Early progression to shock (vs. no progression) was associated with higher 30‐day mortality (13.1% vs. 3.1%, odds ratio [OR] = 4.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.01 to 11.1; p ≤ 0.001). Among 379 patients with uncomplicated sepsis (i.e., no evidence of shock or any end‐organ dysfunction), 86 (22.7%) progressed to severe sepsis or shock within 72 hours of hospital admission. Conclusions: A significant portion of ED patients with less severe sepsis progress to severe sepsis or shock within 72 hours. Additional diagnostic approaches are needed to risk stratify and more effectively treat ED patients with sepsis. ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2010; 17:383–390 © 2010 by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine     

Pharmacologic treatment related to severe sepsis

Severe sepsis is a complex syndrome often resulting in multiple organ dysfunction. This is an extremely challenging problem to manage in the intensive care unit, with mortality rates remaining at unacceptably high levels. Death of patients afflicted by this condition generally results from organ dysfunction syndromes related to hypoperfusion abnormalities. Management of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock can be very complex and challenging, utilizing a significant amount of resources. Pharmacologic support of patients with severe sepsis or septic shock primarily involves agents to support and improve perfusion at the microvascular level. It is important to understand the pharmacologic properties of the medications utilized to manage patients with these conditions. The information presented in this article is based on the best evidence currently available in order to assist the critical care nurse in understanding the pharmacologic therapy related to treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock.     

Reduced mortality after the implementation of a protocol for the early detection of severe sepsis

Objective

We evaluate the impact that implementing an in-hospital protocol for the early detection of sepsis risk has on mortality from severe sepsis/septic shock.

Methods

This was a prospective cohort study conducted in 2 phases at 2 general hospitals in Brazil. In phase I, patients with severe sepsis/septic shock were identified and treated in accordance with the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines. Over the subsequent 12 months (phase II), patients with severe sepsis/septic shock were identified by means of active surveillance for signs of sepsis risk (SSR). We compared the 2 cohorts in terms of demographic variables, the time required for the identification of at least 2 SSRs, compliance with sepsis bundles (6- and 24-hour), and mortality rates.

Results

We identified 217 patients with severe sepsis/septic shock (102 during phase I and 115 during phase II). There were significant differences between phases I and II in terms of the time required for the identification of at least 2 SSRs (34 ± 48 vs 11 ± 17 hours; P < .001) and in terms of in-hospital mortality (61.7% vs 38.2%; P < .001).

Conclusion

The early detection of sepsis promoted early treatment, reducing in-hospital mortality from severe sepsis/septic shock.     

Incidence and mortality of severe sepsis in surgical intensive care patients: the influence of patient gender on disease process and outcome

Objective: Laboratory studies demonstrated significant detrimental effects of male sex-steroids (testosterone) on immune functions following hemorrhagic shock and soft-tissue trauma. Moreover, better survival of female mice subjected to severe sepsis was observed when compared to male animals. The aims of the present study were to evaluate whether or not gender differences regarding incidence and mortality of severe sepsis do exist in surgical intensive care patients and to elucidate the influence of patient age on incidence and mortality of severe sepsis/septic shock.¶Design: Data base review of prospectively collected data from surgical intensive care patients.¶Setting: Surgical intensive care unit of the department of surgery of a university hospital.¶Patients: Prospectively collected data of 4218 intensive care patients (2709 male, 1509 female).¶Results: Significantly fewer female patients were referred to the intensive care unit (6.6 % vs 10.8 % of all patients; P < 0.05) leading to a significantly smaller proportion of female intensive care patients (35.8 % vs 64.2 %). No gender differences regarding number of failing organs or surgical procedure (exception vascular surgery) were observed in patients with and without severe sepsis/septic shock, indicating that the patients studied are comparable regarding general health prior to admission to SICU. Among all female patients referred to SICU only 7.6 % developed severe sepsis/septic shock, while 10.4 % of all male patients suffered from severe sepsis or septic shock (P < 0.05). This gender difference results from a significantly lower incidence of severe sepsis/septic shock in female patients between 60 and 79 years. No gender difference regarding mortality rates of severe sepsis/septic shock was observed (men 64.9 %, women 65.5 %).¶Conclusions: Our results indicate a significantly smaller number of female patients requiring intensive care as well as a significantly lower incidence of severe sepsis/septic shock in female intensive care patients. Mortality from severe sepsis/septic shock, however, is not affected by gender.     

感染性休克集束治疗对病死率影响的前瞻性临床研究

目的 探讨集束治疗对感染性休克患者病死率的影响.方法 采用前瞻性研究方法,将2007年1月-2008年6月重症加强治疗病房(ICU)收治的成人感染性休克患者分为培训前(2007年1-9月)和培训后(2007年10月-2008年6月)两个阶段进行感染性休克集束治疗.分析6 h及24 h感染性休克集柬治疗各指标与预后的关系;采用多元回归分析方法,筛选出集束治疗对感染性休克预后影响的独立相关因素,并研究两个阶段感染性休克集束治疗的依从性、机械通气时间、ICU住院时间以及28 d病死率.结果 研究期间共收治符合条件的感染性休克患者100例,其中培训前51例,培训后49例;存活36例,死亡64例.多元回归分析显示,6 h早期目标导向治疗(EGDT)、24 h EGDT是与感染性休克28 d病死率相关的两个独立保护因素,优势比(OR)分别为0.046和0.120(P均<0.01).培训后集束治疗依从性均有明显提高,其中6 h EGDT和24 h EGDT分别从19.6%、35.3%提升至55.1%、65.3%(P均<0.01).培训后机械通气时间[(166.6±156.4)h比(113.6±73.6)h3、ICU住院时间[(9.4±7.6)d比(6.0±3.9)d]及28 d病死率(72.5%比55.1%)较培训前明显缩短(P<0.05或P<0.01).结论 继续教育培训可提高医务人员对感染性休克集束治疗的依从性,降低感染性休克患者的病死率.     

The Italian SEPSIS study: Preliminary results on the incidence and evolution of SIRS,sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock

This prospective, multicenter, epidemiological study was carried out in 99 Italian ICUs, distributed throughout the country, from April 1993 to March 1994. In the study, we applied the new ACCP/SCCM classification system for sepsis (SIRS, sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock) and determined the prevalence, incidence, evolution and outcome of these categories in critically ill patients. The preliminary analysis of 1101 patients showed that on admission SIRS accounted for about half of the diagnoses (52%) with sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock accounting for 4.5%, 2.1% and 3% of patients, respectively. Patients with severe sepsis or septic shock more frequently had high SAPS scores than patients without sepsis. Mortality rates were similar in patients with SIRS (26.5%) and without SIRS or infection (24%), but rose to 36% in patients with sepsis, to 52% in those with severe sepsis and to 81.8% in those with septic shock. Sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock were more common in patients with medical diagnoses, and neither severe sepsis nor septic shock was observed in trauma patients. With respect to evolution, the incidence of septic shock was progressively higher in patients admitted with more severe “sepsis-related” diagnoses, while only a trivial difference in rates of incidence was observed between SIRS patients and those admitted without SIRS or any septic disorder (nil). The breakdown of the various ACCP/SCCM “sepsis-related” diagnoses at any time during the study was: SIRS in 58% of the population, sepsis in 16.3%, severe sepsis in 5.5% and septic shock in 6.1%. It seems reasonable to expect from the final evaluation of our study answers to the questions raised by the ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference about the correlations between “sepsis-related” diagnosis, severity score, organ dysfunction score and outcome.     

成人严重感染与感染性休克血流动力学监测及支持指南(草案)

严重感染(severe sepsis)及其相关的感染性休克(septic shock)和多器官功能障碍综合征(multiple organ dysfunction syndrome,MODS)是当前重症加强治疗病房(ICU)的主要死亡原因,也是当代重症医学面临的主要焦点及难点。在美国,每年有75万的严重感染病例发生,超过了充血性心力衰竭或乳腺癌、结肠癌和艾滋病的患病数总和,病死率在20%～63%左右,与急性心肌梗死的院外病死率相近,而且患病率以每年1.5%的比例增长,预计到2010年和2020年,严重感染的患病人数将达到93万和110万。美国每年的相关治疗     

Diagnostic and prognostic value of presepsin in the management of sepsis in the emergency department: a multicenter prospective study

Introduction

Sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock are common conditions with high mortality. Their early diagnosis in the Emergency Department (ED) is one of the keys to improving survival. Procalcitonin (PCT) has been used as a biomarker in septic patients but has limited specificity and can be elevated in other scenarios of systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). Soluble CD14 (sCD14) or presepsin is the free fragment of a glycoprotein expressed on monocytes and macrophages. Preliminary reports suggest that levels of presepsin are significantly higher in septic patients than in healthy individuals. The aim of this study is to investigate the diagnostic and prognostic value of presepsin compared to PCT in people presenting at the ED with SIRS and suspected sepsis or septic shock.

Methods

This study was conducted in two major hospitals in Turin, Italy. One hundred six patients presenting to the EDs with suspected sepsis or septic shock were included, and another eighty-three patients affected by SIRS, but with no clinical evidence of infection, were recruited as controls. Blood samples were collected at first medical evaluation and for some patients after 24 and 72 h. The samples were analyzed using the PATHFAST Presepsin assay for sCD14, and commercial kits were used for other determinations (for example, PCT). Definitive diagnosis and survival rates were obtained afterward by analysis of digital medical records.

Results

Elevated concentrations of presepsin at presentation were observed in septic patients compared to control patients. The same trend was observed for mean values of PCT. Higher values of presepsin were observed in septic patients at presentation (time 0). The diagnostic accuracy of PCT was generally higher, and areas under the curve (AUCs) were 0.875 for PCT and 0.701 for presepsin. Mean presepsin values were significantly higher in nonsurvivor septic patients (60-day mortality) than in survivors. No significant correlation was noted between PCT and survival.

Conclusions

In our experience, presepsin was useful in the early diagnosis of infection in a complex population of patients with SIRS, sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock who presented to the ED. Presepsin showed a significant prognostic value, and initial values were significantly correlated with in-hospital mortality of patients affected by sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock.     

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.     

Plasmapheresis in severe sepsis and septic shock: a prospective,randomised, controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To determine the therapeutic efficacy and safety of plasmapheresis in the treatment of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. DESIGN: Prospective, randomised, clinical trial with a planned, midstudy, interim analysis. SETTING: Intensive care unit in a university hospital in Archangels, Russia. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. INTERVENTIONS: One hundred and six patients were randomised to receive either standard therapy or an add-on treatment with plasmapheresis. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The primary endpoint was 28-day survival. Septic shock was diagnosed in 57% of the plasmapheresis-treated patients and 54% of the control patients. Mean APACHE III score at entry was 56.4 in the plasmapheresis group and 53.5 in the control group. The 28-day, all-cause mortality rate was 33.3% (18/54) in the plasmapheresis group and 53.8% (28/52) in the control group. This represents a relative risk for fatal outcome in the plasmapheresis group of 0.61, an absolute risk reduction of 20.5% and a number of patients needed to treat of 4.9. Apart from six transient episodes of hypotension and one allergic reaction to fresh frozen plasma, no adverse reactions were attributable to the plasmapheresis treatment in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Plasmapheresis may be an important adjuvant to conventional treatment to reduce mortality in patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Plasmapheresis is a safe procedure in the treatment of septic patients. A prospective randomised multicentre trial is warranted to confirm our results and to determine which subgroups of septic patients will benefit most from this treatment modality.     

Urinary liver-type fatty acid-binding protein in septic shock: effect of polymyxin B-immobilized fiber hemoperfusion

We aimed to determine retrospectively whether urinary liver-type fatty acid-binding protein (L-FABP) levels are altered in patients with septic shock or severe sepsis without shock and whether polymyxin B-immobilized fiber (PMX-F) hemoperfusion affects these levels. Forty patients with septic shock, 20 patients with severe sepsis without shock, 20 acute renal failure (ARF) patients without septic shock (mean serum creatinine, 2.8 mg/dL), and 30 healthy volunteers were included in this study. Polymyxin B-immobilized fiber hemoperfusion was performed twice in 40 patients. In addition, 10 patients with septic shock without PMX-F treatment (conventional treatment) were also enrolled in this study. Their families did not choose PMX-F treatment. Thus, their informed consents to perform PMX-F treatment were not obtained. Septic shock or severe sepsis was defined by the American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine Consensus Conference Committee. Patients with septic shock were eligible for inclusion in the study if they had a definable source of infection and/or positive blood cultures. Patients with cardiogenic or hemorrhagic shock were excluded from the study. The patients were not randomly allocated to receive PMX-F treatment. Urinary and serum L-FABP levels were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay method. Plasma endotoxin levels in patients with septic shock were significantly higher than those in patients with severe sepsis (P < 0.05), patients with ARF (P < 0.001), and healthy subjects (P < 0.001). Urinary L-FABP levels in patients with septic shock were significantly higher than those in patients with severe sepsis without shock (P < 0.001), patients with ARF (P < 0.001), and healthy subjects (P < 0.001), whereas serum L-FABP levels showed no significant differences between patients with septic shock, patients with severe sepsis, patients with ARF, and healthy subjects. Urinary L-FABP was not correlated with serum L-FABP. Twenty-eight patients with septic shock survived, and 12 patients died. Polymyxin B-immobilized fiber treatment reduced plasma endotoxin levels (P < 0.01) and urinary L-FABP levels (P < 0.01). In 10 patients with septic shock without PMX-F treatment, L-FABP levels remained high 7 days after initiation of conventional treatment (P = 0.12). These results suggest that urinary L-FABP levels are significantly increased in patients with septic shock and that PMX-F treatment is effective in reducing these levels.     

Sepsis incidence and outcome: contrasting the intensive care unit with the hospital ward

OBJECTIVE: To describe the outcome of patients with sepsis according to location on a ward or in an intensive care unit. DESIGN: Prospective multicentered observational study. SETTING: Three academic hospitals in Madrid, Spain. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients with sepsis admitted to participating hospitals from March 1 to June 30, 2003. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: During the study period, 15,852 patients >18 yrs of age were admitted. Sepsis was identified in 702 patients, giving an estimated cumulative incidence rate of 367 cases per 100,000 adult area residents per year and a cumulative incidence rate among patients admitted to the hospital of 4.4%. Most septic patients had a community-acquired infection (71%). Severe sepsis developed in 199 patients (incidence rate, 104 cases per 100,000 adult area residents per year), and 59 patients developed septic shock (incidence rate, 31 cases per 100,000 adult area residents per year). Most of the patients met the criteria for severe sepsis or septic shock on the same day that they would have qualified for the septic status one step down the scale. In the other patients, the median time between sepsis and severe sepsis was 2 days (interquartile range, 2-5) and between severe sepsis and septic shock was 3 days (interquartile range, 1-4). Only 32% of severe sepsis patients received intensive care. The hospital mortality for all septic patients was 12.8%; for severe sepsis, 20.7%; and for septic shock, 45.7%. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows the high incidence of sepsis in a general population of patients admitted to hospital. A significant proportion of patients with severe sepsis are not transferred to the intensive care unit.     

The costs of septic syndromes in the intensive care unit and influence of hospital-acquired sepsis

Objective To document the costs and outcomes of the various forms of the septic syndromes [systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), sepsis, severe sepsis, septic shock), particularly those associated with infection acquired in an intensive care unit (ICU).Design Prospective data collection for all septic patients admitted to a medical ICU during a 1-year period. Costs were computed from the viewpoint of the hospital.Results Mean total hospital costs were €26,256, €35,185, and €27,083 for patients with sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock, respectively. Total costs varied slightly according to the site of infection and the severity of sepsis but were influenced mostly by its mode of acquisition: patients having sepsis associated with ICU-acquired infection incurred total costs about three times those of patients presenting with infection and sepsis on ICU admission (from €39,908 in patients with ICU acquired sepsis to €44,851 in patients with ICU-acquired septic shock). Stratifying patients by the presence of ICU-acquired infection also showed that a first episode of infection complicated by ICU-acquired sepsis incurred at least 2.5 times more costs than a single episode of sepsis.Conclusions In this series the medical costs of sepsis were not markedly influenced by its severity but by its mode of acquisition. Due to wide variations in ICU costs cost-effectiveness analyses of treatments for sepsis should document the case-mix of patients and the contribution to this of nosocomial infections.     

Prognostic value of protein C concentrations in neutropenic patients at high risk of severe septic complications

OBJECTIVE: To assess the prognostic value of protein C, endogenous activated protein C, and D-dimer concentrations in patients at high risk of developing severe septic complications secondary to cytostatic chemotherapy. DESIGN: Prospective, comparative, single-center study. SETTING: Specialized ward for treating patients with acute leukemia and associated intensive care unit at a university hospital. SUBJECTS: Twenty-six consecutive patients who developed either severe sepsis (n = 13) or septic shock (n = 13) during chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (leukocytes <1,000/microL). INTERVENTION: None, other than standard care. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Baseline blood samples were obtained from 97 adult patients treated with intensive cytostatic chemotherapy. Serial blood sampling was performed in 62 of 97 patients who developed fever (>38.3 degrees C). Thirteen patients progressed to severe sepsis and 13 patients to septic shock. Protein C, endogenous activated protein C, and D-dimer were measured in these 26 patients. At fever onset, protein C concentrations decreased from normal baseline concentrations and were significantly lower in the group of patients who progressed to septic shock compared with those who developed severe sepsis (medians for protein C activity: 23.1% vs. 69.5%; p = .0003). The median elapsed time between detection of fever and the diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock was 16 hrs and 12 hrs, respectively. All septic shock patients died, whereas patients who progressed only to severe sepsis survived. CONCLUSIONS: Septic shock in neutropenic patients is associated with increased protein C consumption. The data demonstrate that the coagulation cascade is activated and produces a hypercoagulable state before the onset of clinical symptoms of severe sepsis and septic shock. Low protein C concentrations at the onset of fever and before the onset of clinical symptoms of severe sepsis or septic shock may have prognostic value in predicting an unfavorable outcome. Protein C measurements may help identify patients at risk in an early phase of neutropenic sepsis. It is also attractive to speculate that because low protein C concentrations were seen in these patients, protein C replacement may be beneficial in sepsis.