Intra-abdominal infections (IAI) are among the most common global healthcare challenges and they are usually precipitated by disruption to the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Their successful management typically requires intensive resource utilization, and despite the best therapies, morbidity and mortality remain high. One of the main issues required to appropriately treat IAI that differs from the other etiologies of sepsis is the frequent requirement to provide physical source control. Fortunately, dramatic advances have been made in this aspect of treatment. Historically, source control was left to surgeons only. With new technologies non-surgical less invasive interventional procedures have been introduced. Alternatively, in addition to formal surgery open abdomen techniques have long been proposed as aiding source control in severe intra-abdominal sepsis. It is ironic that while a lack or even delay regarding source control clearly associates with death, it is a concept that remains poorly described. For example, no conclusive definition of source control technique or even adequacy has been universally accepted. Practically, source control involves a complex definition encompassing several factors including the causative event, source of infection bacteria, local bacterial flora, patient condition, and his/her eventual comorbidities. With greater understanding of the systemic pathobiology of sepsis and the profound implications of the human microbiome, adequate source control is no longer only a surgical issue but one that requires a multidisciplinary, multimodality approach. Thus, while any breach in the GI tract must be controlled, source control should also attempt to control the generation and propagation of the systemic biomediators and dysbiotic influences on the microbiome that perpetuate multi-system organ failure and death. Given these increased complexities, the present paper represents the current opinions and recommendations for future research of the World Society of Emergency Surgery, of the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery of Surgical Infection Society Europe and Surgical Infection Society America regarding the concepts and operational adequacy of source control in intra-abdominal infections.

Unlike antibiotic and perfusion support, guidelines for sepsis source control lack high-quality evidence and are ungraded. Internally valid administrative data methods are needed to identify cases representing source control procedures to evaluate outcomes.
Over five modified Delphi rounds, two independent reviewers identified Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes pertinent to source control. In each round, codes with perfect agreement were retained or excluded, whereas disagreements were reviewed by the panelists. Manual review of 400 patient records meeting Sepsis-3 criteria (2010-2017) clinically adjudicated which encounters included source control procedures (gold standard). The performance of consensus codes was compared with the gold standard to assess sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios.
Of 5752 CPT codes, 609 consensus codes represented source control procedures. Of 400 hospitalizations for sepsis, 39 (9.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.0%-13.1%) underwent gold standard source control procedures and 29 (7.3%; 95% CI 4.9-10.3%) consensus code-defined source control procedures. Thirty consensus codes were identified (20.0% gastrointestinal/intraabdominal, 10.0% genitourinary, 13.3% hepatopancreatobiliary, 23.3% orthopedic/cranial, 23.3% soft tissue, and 10.0% intrathoracic), which had 61.5% (95% CI 44.6%-76.6%) sensitivity, 98.6% (95% CI 96.8%-99.6%) specificity, 83.2% (95% CI 66.6%-92.4%) positive, and 95.9% (95% CI 93.9%-97.2%) negative predictive values. With pretest probability at sample prevalence, an identified consensus code had a posttest probability of 83.0% (95% CI 66.0%-92.0%), whereas consensus code absence had a probability of 4.0% (95% CI 3.0-6.0) for undergoing a source control procedure.
Using modified Delphi methodology, we created and validated CPT codes identifying source control procedures, providing a framework for evaluation of the surgical care of patients with sepsis.

The Chinese guidelines for IAI presented here were developed by a panel that included experts from the fields of surgery, critical care, microbiology, infection control, pharmacology, and evidence-based medicine. All questions were structured in population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes format, and evidence profiles were generated. Recommendations were generated following the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system or Best Practice Statement (BPS), when applicable. The final guidelines include 45 graded recommendations and 17 BPSs, including the classification of disease severity, diagnosis, source control, antimicrobial therapy, microbiologic evaluation, nutritional therapy, other supportive therapies, diagnosis and management of specific IAIs, and recognition and management of source control failure. Recommendations on fluid resuscitation and organ support therapy could not be formulated and thus were not included. Accordingly, additional high-quality clinical studies should be performed in the future to address the clinicians\' concerns.

In recent years, both international and domestic societies have published several guidelines on diagnosis and management of intra-abdominal infection. Due to the different evidence and the different methods adopted in the actual formulation of the guidelines, the recommendations of each version of the guidelines are different. Three international guidelines with great impacts were reviewed, including Diagnosis and management of complicated intra-abdominal infection: guidelines by the Surgical Infection Society and the Infectious Diseases Society of America published in 2010, The Surgical Infection Society revised guidelines on the management of intra-abdominal infection published in 2017, and The management of intra-abdominal infections from a global perspective by the World Society of Emergent Surgery. The above guidelines were used to compare with the Chinese guidelines on the diagnosis and management of intra-abdominal infection (2019) which was published in early 2020. Recommendations on the disease severity classification, source control, and antimicrobial therapy are further explained in order to provide guidelines for clinicians.
近年来，国内外学会先后发布了若干版本的腹腔感染诊治指南。由于各版指南依据的循证医学证据不同，指南实际制定采取的方法亦不同，造成了各版指南中推荐意见的差异。本文仅选取2010年由美国感染病学会（IDSA）与北美外科感染学会（SIS）联合发布的《复杂腹腔感染诊治指南》、由SIS牵头更新形成的2017版《腹腔感染诊治指南》和2017年由世界急诊外科学会发布的《基于全球视野的IAI诊治指南》这三部国际影响力较大的指南，以及2020年初我国发表的首部《中国腹腔感染诊治指南（2019版）》，旨在就各版指南在疾病严重度分级、感染源控制以及抗感染治疗等方面的推荐意见进行解读，希望能够为临床上更好地应用指南提供参考。.