Loading…
A Nationwide Comparison Between Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 Definition in Japan
Background: Currently, it remains controversial whether the Sepsis-3 definition provides the most appropriate criteria for clinical use. The purpose of this study was to compare between the Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 definitions using Japan’s nationwide registry. Methods: Data were obtained from a multic...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of intensive care medicine 2020-12, Vol.35 (12), p.1389-1395 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-110cf7d48606d33200101deca6fe6d70743e0f3e542dc5337daea2a2a58f74d53 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-110cf7d48606d33200101deca6fe6d70743e0f3e542dc5337daea2a2a58f74d53 |
container_end_page | 1395 |
container_issue | 12 |
container_start_page | 1389 |
container_title | Journal of intensive care medicine |
container_volume | 35 |
creator | Takauji, Shuhei Hayakawa, Mineji Fujita, Satoshi |
description | Background:
Currently, it remains controversial whether the Sepsis-3 definition provides the most appropriate criteria for clinical use. The purpose of this study was to compare between the Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 definitions using Japan’s nationwide registry.
Methods:
Data were obtained from a multicenter registry conducted at 42 intensive care units (ICUs) throughout Japan, in which patients received treatment for severe sepsis or septic shock between January 2011 and December 2013.
Results:
A total of 2797 patients diagnosed using the Sepsis-2 criteria were included in the present study. These patients were categorized into “Severe sepsis” (n = 1154) and “Sepsis-2 shock” (n = 1643) groups. Among the “Sepsis-2 shock” group, patients who did not meet the Sepsis-3 criteria for septic shock were categorized into the “Sepsis-2 shock-only” (n = 448, 27.3%) group, while patients who met the Sepsis-3 criteria for septic shock were categorized into “Sepsis-3 shock (n = 1195, 72.7%)” group. The ICU mortality in the “Sepsis-3 shock” group, “Sepsis-2 shock-only” group, and “Severe sepsis” group was 28.5%, 10.9%, and 14.1%, respectively. We observed no significant difference between the “Severe sepsis” and “Sepsis-2 shock-only” groups in terms of in-hospital survival (P = .098), while the “Sepsis-3 shock” group had the highest in-hospital mortality rate (P < .001). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, liver insufficiency and immunocompromised status were independent prognostic factors in the “Sepsis-2 shock-only” group. In contrast, chronic heart disease and chronic hemodialysis were independent prognostic factors in the “Sepsis-3 shock” group.
Conclusions:
The ICU mortality of the “Sepsis-2 shock-only” group was significantly low. Besides septic shock diagnosed by the Sepsis-3 definition selects patients with more severe cases of sepsis among the “Sepsis-2 shock” group. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/0885066618823151 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2179339619</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_0885066618823151</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2179339619</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-110cf7d48606d33200101deca6fe6d70743e0f3e542dc5337daea2a2a58f74d53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kL1PwzAQxS0EoqWwMyGPLAFf_JWMpXwVVTAAc2TiC3LVOCFOVPHfkygtAxK64XS633u6e4ScA7sC0PqaJYlkSilIkpiDhAMyBRnLCESSHpLpsI6G_YSchLBmDHiPHZMJZ4orkcopWc7ps2ld5bfOIl1UZW0aFypPb7DdInr6inVwIYqp8XY_cHqLhfNu0FHn6ZOpjT8lR4XZBDzb9Rl5v797WzxGq5eH5WK-inIhZBsBsLzQViSKKct53B_FwGJuVIHKaqYFR1ZwlCK2ueRcW4Mm7ksmhRZW8hm5HH3rpvrqMLRZ6UKOm43xWHUhi0GnnKcK0h5lI5o3VQgNFlnduNI03xmwbAgw-xtgL7nYuXcfJdpfwT6xHohGIJhPzNZV1_j-2_8NfwA0CnX6</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2179339619</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Nationwide Comparison Between Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 Definition in Japan</title><source>Sage Journals Online</source><creator>Takauji, Shuhei ; Hayakawa, Mineji ; Fujita, Satoshi</creator><creatorcontrib>Takauji, Shuhei ; Hayakawa, Mineji ; Fujita, Satoshi</creatorcontrib><description>Background:
Currently, it remains controversial whether the Sepsis-3 definition provides the most appropriate criteria for clinical use. The purpose of this study was to compare between the Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 definitions using Japan’s nationwide registry.
Methods:
Data were obtained from a multicenter registry conducted at 42 intensive care units (ICUs) throughout Japan, in which patients received treatment for severe sepsis or septic shock between January 2011 and December 2013.
Results:
A total of 2797 patients diagnosed using the Sepsis-2 criteria were included in the present study. These patients were categorized into “Severe sepsis” (n = 1154) and “Sepsis-2 shock” (n = 1643) groups. Among the “Sepsis-2 shock” group, patients who did not meet the Sepsis-3 criteria for septic shock were categorized into the “Sepsis-2 shock-only” (n = 448, 27.3%) group, while patients who met the Sepsis-3 criteria for septic shock were categorized into “Sepsis-3 shock (n = 1195, 72.7%)” group. The ICU mortality in the “Sepsis-3 shock” group, “Sepsis-2 shock-only” group, and “Severe sepsis” group was 28.5%, 10.9%, and 14.1%, respectively. We observed no significant difference between the “Severe sepsis” and “Sepsis-2 shock-only” groups in terms of in-hospital survival (P = .098), while the “Sepsis-3 shock” group had the highest in-hospital mortality rate (P < .001). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, liver insufficiency and immunocompromised status were independent prognostic factors in the “Sepsis-2 shock-only” group. In contrast, chronic heart disease and chronic hemodialysis were independent prognostic factors in the “Sepsis-3 shock” group.
Conclusions:
The ICU mortality of the “Sepsis-2 shock-only” group was significantly low. Besides septic shock diagnosed by the Sepsis-3 definition selects patients with more severe cases of sepsis among the “Sepsis-2 shock” group.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0885-0666</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-1489</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/0885066618823151</identifier><identifier>PMID: 30636495</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Hospital Mortality ; Humans ; Intensive Care Units ; Japan - epidemiology ; Sepsis - classification ; Sepsis - diagnosis ; Sepsis - mortality ; Shock, Septic - diagnosis ; Shock, Septic - mortality</subject><ispartof>Journal of intensive care medicine, 2020-12, Vol.35 (12), p.1389-1395</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-110cf7d48606d33200101deca6fe6d70743e0f3e542dc5337daea2a2a58f74d53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-110cf7d48606d33200101deca6fe6d70743e0f3e542dc5337daea2a2a58f74d53</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5794-7586</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,79364</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30636495$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Takauji, Shuhei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayakawa, Mineji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fujita, Satoshi</creatorcontrib><title>A Nationwide Comparison Between Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 Definition in Japan</title><title>Journal of intensive care medicine</title><addtitle>J Intensive Care Med</addtitle><description>Background:
Currently, it remains controversial whether the Sepsis-3 definition provides the most appropriate criteria for clinical use. The purpose of this study was to compare between the Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 definitions using Japan’s nationwide registry.
Methods:
Data were obtained from a multicenter registry conducted at 42 intensive care units (ICUs) throughout Japan, in which patients received treatment for severe sepsis or septic shock between January 2011 and December 2013.
Results:
A total of 2797 patients diagnosed using the Sepsis-2 criteria were included in the present study. These patients were categorized into “Severe sepsis” (n = 1154) and “Sepsis-2 shock” (n = 1643) groups. Among the “Sepsis-2 shock” group, patients who did not meet the Sepsis-3 criteria for septic shock were categorized into the “Sepsis-2 shock-only” (n = 448, 27.3%) group, while patients who met the Sepsis-3 criteria for septic shock were categorized into “Sepsis-3 shock (n = 1195, 72.7%)” group. The ICU mortality in the “Sepsis-3 shock” group, “Sepsis-2 shock-only” group, and “Severe sepsis” group was 28.5%, 10.9%, and 14.1%, respectively. We observed no significant difference between the “Severe sepsis” and “Sepsis-2 shock-only” groups in terms of in-hospital survival (P = .098), while the “Sepsis-3 shock” group had the highest in-hospital mortality rate (P < .001). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, liver insufficiency and immunocompromised status were independent prognostic factors in the “Sepsis-2 shock-only” group. In contrast, chronic heart disease and chronic hemodialysis were independent prognostic factors in the “Sepsis-3 shock” group.
Conclusions:
The ICU mortality of the “Sepsis-2 shock-only” group was significantly low. Besides septic shock diagnosed by the Sepsis-3 definition selects patients with more severe cases of sepsis among the “Sepsis-2 shock” group.</description><subject>Hospital Mortality</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Intensive Care Units</subject><subject>Japan - epidemiology</subject><subject>Sepsis - classification</subject><subject>Sepsis - diagnosis</subject><subject>Sepsis - mortality</subject><subject>Shock, Septic - diagnosis</subject><subject>Shock, Septic - mortality</subject><issn>0885-0666</issn><issn>1525-1489</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kL1PwzAQxS0EoqWwMyGPLAFf_JWMpXwVVTAAc2TiC3LVOCFOVPHfkygtAxK64XS633u6e4ScA7sC0PqaJYlkSilIkpiDhAMyBRnLCESSHpLpsI6G_YSchLBmDHiPHZMJZ4orkcopWc7ps2ld5bfOIl1UZW0aFypPb7DdInr6inVwIYqp8XY_cHqLhfNu0FHn6ZOpjT8lR4XZBDzb9Rl5v797WzxGq5eH5WK-inIhZBsBsLzQViSKKct53B_FwGJuVIHKaqYFR1ZwlCK2ueRcW4Mm7ksmhRZW8hm5HH3rpvrqMLRZ6UKOm43xWHUhi0GnnKcK0h5lI5o3VQgNFlnduNI03xmwbAgw-xtgL7nYuXcfJdpfwT6xHohGIJhPzNZV1_j-2_8NfwA0CnX6</recordid><startdate>20201201</startdate><enddate>20201201</enddate><creator>Takauji, Shuhei</creator><creator>Hayakawa, Mineji</creator><creator>Fujita, Satoshi</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5794-7586</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20201201</creationdate><title>A Nationwide Comparison Between Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 Definition in Japan</title><author>Takauji, Shuhei ; Hayakawa, Mineji ; Fujita, Satoshi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-110cf7d48606d33200101deca6fe6d70743e0f3e542dc5337daea2a2a58f74d53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Hospital Mortality</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Intensive Care Units</topic><topic>Japan - epidemiology</topic><topic>Sepsis - classification</topic><topic>Sepsis - diagnosis</topic><topic>Sepsis - mortality</topic><topic>Shock, Septic - diagnosis</topic><topic>Shock, Septic - mortality</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Takauji, Shuhei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hayakawa, Mineji</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fujita, Satoshi</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of intensive care medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Takauji, Shuhei</au><au>Hayakawa, Mineji</au><au>Fujita, Satoshi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Nationwide Comparison Between Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 Definition in Japan</atitle><jtitle>Journal of intensive care medicine</jtitle><addtitle>J Intensive Care Med</addtitle><date>2020-12-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>1389</spage><epage>1395</epage><pages>1389-1395</pages><issn>0885-0666</issn><eissn>1525-1489</eissn><abstract>Background:
Currently, it remains controversial whether the Sepsis-3 definition provides the most appropriate criteria for clinical use. The purpose of this study was to compare between the Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 definitions using Japan’s nationwide registry.
Methods:
Data were obtained from a multicenter registry conducted at 42 intensive care units (ICUs) throughout Japan, in which patients received treatment for severe sepsis or septic shock between January 2011 and December 2013.
Results:
A total of 2797 patients diagnosed using the Sepsis-2 criteria were included in the present study. These patients were categorized into “Severe sepsis” (n = 1154) and “Sepsis-2 shock” (n = 1643) groups. Among the “Sepsis-2 shock” group, patients who did not meet the Sepsis-3 criteria for septic shock were categorized into the “Sepsis-2 shock-only” (n = 448, 27.3%) group, while patients who met the Sepsis-3 criteria for septic shock were categorized into “Sepsis-3 shock (n = 1195, 72.7%)” group. The ICU mortality in the “Sepsis-3 shock” group, “Sepsis-2 shock-only” group, and “Severe sepsis” group was 28.5%, 10.9%, and 14.1%, respectively. We observed no significant difference between the “Severe sepsis” and “Sepsis-2 shock-only” groups in terms of in-hospital survival (P = .098), while the “Sepsis-3 shock” group had the highest in-hospital mortality rate (P < .001). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, liver insufficiency and immunocompromised status were independent prognostic factors in the “Sepsis-2 shock-only” group. In contrast, chronic heart disease and chronic hemodialysis were independent prognostic factors in the “Sepsis-3 shock” group.
Conclusions:
The ICU mortality of the “Sepsis-2 shock-only” group was significantly low. Besides septic shock diagnosed by the Sepsis-3 definition selects patients with more severe cases of sepsis among the “Sepsis-2 shock” group.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>30636495</pmid><doi>10.1177/0885066618823151</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5794-7586</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0885-0666 |
ispartof | Journal of intensive care medicine, 2020-12, Vol.35 (12), p.1389-1395 |
issn | 0885-0666 1525-1489 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2179339619 |
source | Sage Journals Online |
subjects | Hospital Mortality Humans Intensive Care Units Japan - epidemiology Sepsis - classification Sepsis - diagnosis Sepsis - mortality Shock, Septic - diagnosis Shock, Septic - mortality |
title | A Nationwide Comparison Between Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 Definition in Japan |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T02%3A13%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Nationwide%20Comparison%20Between%20Sepsis-2%20and%20Sepsis-3%20Definition%20in%20Japan&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20intensive%20care%20medicine&rft.au=Takauji,%20Shuhei&rft.date=2020-12-01&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=1389&rft.epage=1395&rft.pages=1389-1395&rft.issn=0885-0666&rft.eissn=1525-1489&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/0885066618823151&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2179339619%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-110cf7d48606d33200101deca6fe6d70743e0f3e542dc5337daea2a2a58f74d53%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2179339619&rft_id=info:pmid/30636495&rft_sage_id=10.1177_0885066618823151&rfr_iscdi=true |