The time to administration of broad-spectrum antibiotics and (secondarily) to the initiation of hemodynamic stabilization are the most important factors influencing survival of patients with sepsis and septic shock; however, the basic prerequisite for the initiation of an adequate treatment is that a suspected diagnosis of sepsis is made first. Therefore, the treatment of sepsis, even before it has begun, is an interdisciplinary and interprofessional task. This article provides an overview of the current state of the art in sepsis treatment and points towards new evidence that has the potential to change guideline recommendations in the coming years. In summary, the following points are critical: (1) sepsis must be diagnosed as soon as possible and the implementation of a source control intervention (in case of a controllable source) has to be implemented as soon as (logistically) possible. (2) In general, intravenous broad-spectrum antibiotics should be given within the first hour after diagnosis if sepsis or septic shock is suspected. In organ dysfunction without shock, where sepsis is a possible but unlikely cause, the results of focused advanced diagnostics should be awaited before a decision to give broad-spectrum antibiotics is made. If it is not clear within 3 h whether sepsis is the cause, broad-spectrum antibiotics should be given when in doubt. Administer beta-lactam antibiotics as a prolonged (or if therapeutic drug monitoring is available, continuous) infusion after an initial loading dose. (3) Combination treatment with two agents for one pathogen group should remain the exception (e.g. multidrug-resistant gram-negative pathogens). (4) In the case of doubt, the duration of anti-infective treatment should rather be shorter than longer. Procalcitonin can support the clinical decision to stop (not to start!) antibiotic treatment! (5) For fluid treatment, if hypoperfusion is present, the first (approximately) 2L (30 ml/kg BW) of crystalloid solution is usually safe and indicated. After that, the rule is: less is more! Any further fluid administration should be carefully weighed up with the help of dynamic parameters, the patient\'s clinical condition and echo(cardio)graphy.
Die Zeiten bis zur Gabe eines Breitbandantibiotikums und (nachgeordnet) bis zum Beginn der hämodynamischen Stabilisierung sind die wichtigsten Einflussfaktoren für das Überleben von Patienten mit Sepsis und septischem Schock. Grundvoraussetzung für den Beginn einer adäquaten Therapie ist jedoch zunächst, dass die Verdachtsdiagnose „Sepsis“ gestellt wird. Die Behandlung der Sepsis ist daher, noch bevor sie begonnen hat, eine interdisziplinäre und interprofessionelle Aufgabe. Der vorliegende Artikel gibt eine Übersicht über den aktuellen „State of the Art“ der Sepsistherapie und weist auf neue Evidenz hin, die das Potenzial hat, die Leitlinienempfehlungen in den nächsten Jahren zu verändern.

Hemodynamic instability due to dysregulated host response is a life-threatening condition requiring vasopressors and vital organ support. Hemoadsorption with Cytosorb has proven to be effective in reducing cytokines and possibly in attenuating the devastating effects of the cytokine storm originating from the immune over-response to the initial insult. We reviewed the PubMed database to assess evidence of the impact of Cytosorb on norepinephrine needs in the critically ill. We further analyzed those studies including data on control cohorts in a comparative pooled analysis, defining a treatment effect as the standardized mean differences in relative reductions in vasopressor dosage at 24 h. The literature search returned 33 eligible studies. We found evidence of a significant reduction in norepinephrine requirement after treatment: median before, 0.55 (IQR: 0.39-0.90); after, 0.09 (0.00-0.25) μg/kg/min, p < 0.001. The pooled effect size at 24 h was large, though characterized by high heterogeneity. In light of the importance of a quick resolution of hemodynamic instability in the critically ill, further research is encouraged to enrich knowledge on the potentials of the therapy.

UNASSIGNED: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of sac embolization with N-butyl cyanoacrylate (NBCA) in emergency endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and iliac artery aneurysm (IAA) in comparison to EVAR without sac embolization.
UNASSIGNED: Between February 2012 and December 2019, among 44 consecutive patients with ruptured AAA or IAA, 29 underwent EVAR. Of these, 22 patients (median age 77.5 years; 18 men) had concomitant sac embolization using NBCA; the remaining 7 patients (median age 88 years; 6 men) underwent EVAR without sac embolization and form the control group. The technical success, clinical success (hemodynamic stabilization), procedure-related complications, and mortality were compared between the groups.
UNASSIGNED: All EVAR procedures and embolizations were successful. The clinical success rates in the NBCA and control groups were 95% (21/22) and 71% (5/7), respectively (p=0.14). There was no complication related to the procedure. Type II endoleak occurred in 4 of 21 patients (19%) in the NBCA group vs none of the control patients. One patient (5%) died in the NBCA group vs 3 (43%) in the controls (p=0.034).
UNASSIGNED: Sac embolization using NBCA in emergency EVAR appears to be feasible and safe for ruptured AAA and IAA.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common and severe complication in patients in the intensive care unit with a significant impact on patient\'s mortality and morbidity. Therefore renal protective therapy is very important in these severely ill patients.
OBJECTIVE: Several renal protective strategies have been postulated during recent decades, which came from pathophysiologic concepts and have been contradicted or changed during the last few years. So lessons had to be learned in AKI, leading to new, in many cases completely reversed preventive and therapeutic concepts which may also be important for protection in other organs.
RESULTS: Most important for renal protection is the early identification of patients at risk for AKI or with acute kidney damage before renal function further deteriorates. A stage-based management of AKI comprises more general measures like discontinuation of the nephrotoxic agent but most importantly early hemodynamic stabilization. Recent research has contradicted that AKI is renal ischemia caused by vasoconstriction with consecutive tubular necrosis. In septic AKI, renal blood flow is even increased. Intrarenal vasodilation together with microcirculatory changes and redistribution of blood flow lead to a drop in glomerular filtration by functional changes. Accordingly it had to be learned that not vasodilators but vasoconstrictors are beneficial in AKI. A mean arterial blood pressure target of >65 mm Hg is often recommended but exact targets are not known, and patients with pre-existing hypertension even need higher perfusion pressure. Also the concept that fluid therapy is always beneficial for the kidney in shock states had to be revised. A volume restrictive therapy with only balanced crystalloids is also becoming more important in AKI. Still no specific pharmacological therapy for renal protection is available. Inflammation and mitochondrial dysfunction appear to play a significant role in AKI. Anti-inflammatory strategies are under investigation and may become more important for AKI prevention and therapy in the future. (This article is freely available.).

Abdominal sepsis is the most severe form of abdominal infection. It is characterized by a dysregulated host response to infection leading to life-threatening organ failure or septic shock. The latter has a mortality of >40%. This article reviews the evidence on the strategic approach to treatment of patients with abdominal sepsis and septic shock. The focus is on the time-critical elements of diagnosis, anti-infective treatment and hemodynamic stabilization.