Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

Andrew Rhodes, Laura E. Evans, Waleed Alhazzani, Mitchell M. Levy, Massimo Antonelli, Ricard Ferrer, Anand Kumar, Jonathan E. Sevransky, Charles L. Sprung, Mark E. Nunnally, Bram Rochwerg, Gordon D. Rubenfeld, Derek C. Angus, Djillali Annane, Richard J. Beale, Geoffrey J. Bellinghan, Gordon R. Bernard, Jean Daniel Chiche, Craig Coopersmith, Daniel P. De BackerCraig J. French, Seitaro Fujishima, Herwig Gerlach, Jorge Luis Hidalgo, Steven M. Hollenberg, Alan E. Jones, Dilip R. Karnad, Ruth M. Kleinpell, Younsuk Koh, Thiago Costa Lisboa, Flavia R. Machado, John J. Marini, John C. Marshall, John E. Mazuski, Lauralyn A. McIntyre, Anthony S. McLean, Sangeeta Mehta, Rui P. Moreno, John Myburgh, Paolo Navalesi, Osamu Nishida, Tiffany M. Osborn, Anders Perner, Colleen M. Plunkett, Marco Ranieri, Christa A. Schorr, Maureen A. Seckel, Christopher W. Seymour, Lisa Shieh, Khalid A. Shukri, Steven Q. Simpson, Mervyn Singer, B. Taylor Thompson, Sean R. Townsend, Thomas Van der Poll, Jean Louis Vincent, W. Joost Wiersinga, Janice L. Zimmerman, R. Phillip Dellinger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1136 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)304-377
Number of pages74
JournalIntensive Care Medicine
Volume43
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017 Mar 1

Fingerprint

Septic Shock
Sepsis
Guidelines
Practice Guidelines
Committee Membership
Telecommunications
Conflict of Interest
Critical Illness
Resuscitation
Ventilation
Patient Care
Hemodynamics
Organizations
Mortality
Infection
Population

Keywords

  • Evidence-based medicine
  • Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria
  • Guidelines
  • Infection
  • Sepsis
  • Sepsis bundles
  • Sepsis syndrome
  • Septic shock
  • Surviving Sepsis Campaign

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Rhodes, A., Evans, L. E., Alhazzani, W., Levy, M. M., Antonelli, M., Ferrer, R., ... Dellinger, R. P. (2017). Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016. Intensive Care Medicine, 43(3), 304-377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6

Surviving Sepsis Campaign : International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016. / Rhodes, Andrew; Evans, Laura E.; Alhazzani, Waleed; Levy, Mitchell M.; Antonelli, Massimo; Ferrer, Ricard; Kumar, Anand; Sevransky, Jonathan E.; Sprung, Charles L.; Nunnally, Mark E.; Rochwerg, Bram; Rubenfeld, Gordon D.; Angus, Derek C.; Annane, Djillali; Beale, Richard J.; Bellinghan, Geoffrey J.; Bernard, Gordon R.; Chiche, Jean Daniel; Coopersmith, Craig; De Backer, Daniel P.; French, Craig J.; Fujishima, Seitaro; Gerlach, Herwig; Hidalgo, Jorge Luis; Hollenberg, Steven M.; Jones, Alan E.; Karnad, Dilip R.; Kleinpell, Ruth M.; Koh, Younsuk; Lisboa, Thiago Costa; Machado, Flavia R.; Marini, John J.; Marshall, John C.; Mazuski, John E.; McIntyre, Lauralyn A.; McLean, Anthony S.; Mehta, Sangeeta; Moreno, Rui P.; Myburgh, John; Navalesi, Paolo; Nishida, Osamu; Osborn, Tiffany M.; Perner, Anders; Plunkett, Colleen M.; Ranieri, Marco; Schorr, Christa A.; Seckel, Maureen A.; Seymour, Christopher W.; Shieh, Lisa; Shukri, Khalid A.; Simpson, Steven Q.; Singer, Mervyn; Thompson, B. Taylor; Townsend, Sean R.; Van der Poll, Thomas; Vincent, Jean Louis; Wiersinga, W. Joost; Zimmerman, Janice L.; Dellinger, R. Phillip.

In: Intensive Care Medicine, Vol. 43, No. 3, 01.03.2017, p. 304-377.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rhodes, A, Evans, LE, Alhazzani, W, Levy, MM, Antonelli, M, Ferrer, R, Kumar, A, Sevransky, JE, Sprung, CL, Nunnally, ME, Rochwerg, B, Rubenfeld, GD, Angus, DC, Annane, D, Beale, RJ, Bellinghan, GJ, Bernard, GR, Chiche, JD, Coopersmith, C, De Backer, DP, French, CJ, Fujishima, S, Gerlach, H, Hidalgo, JL, Hollenberg, SM, Jones, AE, Karnad, DR, Kleinpell, RM, Koh, Y, Lisboa, TC, Machado, FR, Marini, JJ, Marshall, JC, Mazuski, JE, McIntyre, LA, McLean, AS, Mehta, S, Moreno, RP, Myburgh, J, Navalesi, P, Nishida, O, Osborn, TM, Perner, A, Plunkett, CM, Ranieri, M, Schorr, CA, Seckel, MA, Seymour, CW, Shieh, L, Shukri, KA, Simpson, SQ, Singer, M, Thompson, BT, Townsend, SR, Van der Poll, T, Vincent, JL, Wiersinga, WJ, Zimmerman, JL & Dellinger, RP 2017, 'Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016', Intensive Care Medicine, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 304-377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6
Rhodes, Andrew ; Evans, Laura E. ; Alhazzani, Waleed ; Levy, Mitchell M. ; Antonelli, Massimo ; Ferrer, Ricard ; Kumar, Anand ; Sevransky, Jonathan E. ; Sprung, Charles L. ; Nunnally, Mark E. ; Rochwerg, Bram ; Rubenfeld, Gordon D. ; Angus, Derek C. ; Annane, Djillali ; Beale, Richard J. ; Bellinghan, Geoffrey J. ; Bernard, Gordon R. ; Chiche, Jean Daniel ; Coopersmith, Craig ; De Backer, Daniel P. ; French, Craig J. ; Fujishima, Seitaro ; Gerlach, Herwig ; Hidalgo, Jorge Luis ; Hollenberg, Steven M. ; Jones, Alan E. ; Karnad, Dilip R. ; Kleinpell, Ruth M. ; Koh, Younsuk ; Lisboa, Thiago Costa ; Machado, Flavia R. ; Marini, John J. ; Marshall, John C. ; Mazuski, John E. ; McIntyre, Lauralyn A. ; McLean, Anthony S. ; Mehta, Sangeeta ; Moreno, Rui P. ; Myburgh, John ; Navalesi, Paolo ; Nishida, Osamu ; Osborn, Tiffany M. ; Perner, Anders ; Plunkett, Colleen M. ; Ranieri, Marco ; Schorr, Christa A. ; Seckel, Maureen A. ; Seymour, Christopher W. ; Shieh, Lisa ; Shukri, Khalid A. ; Simpson, Steven Q. ; Singer, Mervyn ; Thompson, B. Taylor ; Townsend, Sean R. ; Van der Poll, Thomas ; Vincent, Jean Louis ; Wiersinga, W. Joost ; Zimmerman, Janice L. ; Dellinger, R. Phillip. / Surviving Sepsis Campaign : International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016. In: Intensive Care Medicine. 2017 ; Vol. 43, No. 3. pp. 304-377.
@article{7b03cb77337a4490b7d329512eb07529,
title = "Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016",
abstract = "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.",
keywords = "Evidence-based medicine, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria, Guidelines, Infection, Sepsis, Sepsis bundles, Sepsis syndrome, Septic shock, Surviving Sepsis Campaign",
author = "Andrew Rhodes and Evans, {Laura E.} and Waleed Alhazzani and Levy, {Mitchell M.} and Massimo Antonelli and Ricard Ferrer and Anand Kumar and Sevransky, {Jonathan E.} and Sprung, {Charles L.} and Nunnally, {Mark E.} and Bram Rochwerg and Rubenfeld, {Gordon D.} and Angus, {Derek C.} and Djillali Annane and Beale, {Richard J.} and Bellinghan, {Geoffrey J.} and Bernard, {Gordon R.} and Chiche, {Jean Daniel} and Craig Coopersmith and {De Backer}, {Daniel P.} and French, {Craig J.} and Seitaro Fujishima and Herwig Gerlach and Hidalgo, {Jorge Luis} and Hollenberg, {Steven M.} and Jones, {Alan E.} and Karnad, {Dilip R.} and Kleinpell, {Ruth M.} and Younsuk Koh and Lisboa, {Thiago Costa} and Machado, {Flavia R.} and Marini, {John J.} and Marshall, {John C.} and Mazuski, {John E.} and McIntyre, {Lauralyn A.} and McLean, {Anthony S.} and Sangeeta Mehta and Moreno, {Rui P.} and John Myburgh and Paolo Navalesi and Osamu Nishida and Osborn, {Tiffany M.} and Anders Perner and Plunkett, {Colleen M.} and Marco Ranieri and Schorr, {Christa A.} and Seckel, {Maureen A.} and Seymour, {Christopher W.} and Lisa Shieh and Shukri, {Khalid A.} and Simpson, {Steven Q.} and Mervyn Singer and Thompson, {B. Taylor} and Townsend, {Sean R.} and {Van der Poll}, Thomas and Vincent, {Jean Louis} and Wiersinga, {W. Joost} and Zimmerman, {Janice L.} and Dellinger, {R. Phillip}",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6",
language = "English",
volume = "43",
pages = "304--377",
journal = "Intensive Care Medicine",
issn = "0342-4642",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Surviving Sepsis Campaign

T2 - International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

AU - Rhodes, Andrew

AU - Evans, Laura E.

AU - Alhazzani, Waleed

AU - Levy, Mitchell M.

AU - Antonelli, Massimo

AU - Ferrer, Ricard

AU - Kumar, Anand

AU - Sevransky, Jonathan E.

AU - Sprung, Charles L.

AU - Nunnally, Mark E.

AU - Rochwerg, Bram

AU - Rubenfeld, Gordon D.

AU - Angus, Derek C.

AU - Annane, Djillali

AU - Beale, Richard J.

AU - Bellinghan, Geoffrey J.

AU - Bernard, Gordon R.

AU - Chiche, Jean Daniel

AU - Coopersmith, Craig

AU - De Backer, Daniel P.

AU - French, Craig J.

AU - Fujishima, Seitaro

AU - Gerlach, Herwig

AU - Hidalgo, Jorge Luis

AU - Hollenberg, Steven M.

AU - Jones, Alan E.

AU - Karnad, Dilip R.

AU - Kleinpell, Ruth M.

AU - Koh, Younsuk

AU - Lisboa, Thiago Costa

AU - Machado, Flavia R.

AU - Marini, John J.

AU - Marshall, John C.

AU - Mazuski, John E.

AU - McIntyre, Lauralyn A.

AU - McLean, Anthony S.

AU - Mehta, Sangeeta

AU - Moreno, Rui P.

AU - Myburgh, John

AU - Navalesi, Paolo

AU - Nishida, Osamu

AU - Osborn, Tiffany M.

AU - Perner, Anders

AU - Plunkett, Colleen M.

AU - Ranieri, Marco

AU - Schorr, Christa A.

AU - Seckel, Maureen A.

AU - Seymour, Christopher W.

AU - Shieh, Lisa

AU - Shukri, Khalid A.

AU - Simpson, Steven Q.

AU - Singer, Mervyn

AU - Thompson, B. Taylor

AU - Townsend, Sean R.

AU - Van der Poll, Thomas

AU - Vincent, Jean Louis

AU - Wiersinga, W. Joost

AU - Zimmerman, Janice L.

AU - Dellinger, R. Phillip

PY - 2017/3/1

Y1 - 2017/3/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Evidence-based medicine

KW - Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria

KW - Guidelines

KW - Infection

KW - Sepsis

KW - Sepsis bundles

KW - Sepsis syndrome

KW - Septic shock

KW - Surviving Sepsis Campaign

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85009740698&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85009740698&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6

DO - 10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6

M3 - Article

C2 - 28101605

AN - SCOPUS:85009740698

VL - 43

SP - 304

EP - 377

JO - Intensive Care Medicine

JF - Intensive Care Medicine

SN - 0342-4642

IS - 3

ER -