Explore the vast range of titles available.

Acute respiratory failure (ARF) is defined by acute and progressive hypoxemia caused by various cardiorespiratory or systemic diseases in previously healthy patients. Among ARF, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a serious condition with bilateral lung infiltration, which develops secondary to a variety of underlying conditions, diseases, or injuries. This review summarizes the current standard of care for ARF and ARDS based on current major guidelines in this field. When administering fluid in patients with ARF, particularly ARDS, restrictive strategies need to be considered in patients without shock or multiple organ dysfunction. Regarding oxygenation targets, avoiding excessive hyperoxemia and hypoxemia is probably a reasonable choice. As a result of the rapid spread and accumulation of evidence for high-flow nasal cannula oxygenation, it is now weakly recommended for the respiratory management of ARF in general and even for initial management of ARDS. Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation is also weakly recommended for the management of certain ARF conditions and as initial management of ARDS. Low tidal volume ventilation is now weakly recommended for all patients with ARF and strongly recommended for patients with ARDS. Limiting plateau pressure and high-level PEEP are weakly recommended for moderate-to-severe ARDS. Prone position ventilation with prolonged hours is weakly to strongly recommended for moderate-to-severe ARDS. In patients with COVID-19, ventilatory management is essentially the same as for ARF and ARDS, but awake prone positioning may be considered. In addition to standard care, treatment optimization and individualization, as well as the introduction of exploratory treatment, should be considered as appropriate. As a single pathogen, such as SARS-CoV-2, exhibits a wide variety of pathologies and lung dysfunction, ventilatory management for ARF and ARDS may be better tailored according to the respiratory physiologic status of individual patients rather than the causal or underlying diseases and conditions.

Despite advances in treatment and the expansion of standard care, pneumonia remains a major cause of mortality. It frequently leads to complications such as septic shock and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), both of which carry high fatality rates. Although antimicrobial therapy is the cornerstone of treatment, additional supportive care and adjunctive therapies, such as corticosteroids, are often required, especially in severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Recent updates to major guidelines on CAP, sepsis, ARDS, and critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency generally support corticosteroid use in severe CAP. However, the REMAP-CAP randomized controlled trial, published in 2025, failed to demonstrate significant benefit, potentially influencing future recommendations. Currently, corticosteroid therapy should be individualized based on CAP severity, particularly the degree of hypoxemia and respiratory failure. In eligible patients, early initiation and flexible duration of corticosteroid use based on clinical response may be appropriate. For nonbacterial pneumonia, strong evidence supporting corticosteroid use exists only for COVID-19 and Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in HIV-infected individuals. Conversely, observational data do not support corticosteroid use for influenza or fungal infections. In CAP complicated by septic shock or ARDS, corticosteroid use is endorsed by recent guidelines; however, the recommended timing, dosage, and duration vary. Although combination therapy with hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone is a potential option, further direct evidence is needed. Biomarkers such as C-reactive protein and, in the near future, insights into corticosteroid-related immune repair mechanisms in COVID-19 may aid in identifying corticosteroid-responsive phenotypes.

Despite advances in intensive care and the widespread use of standardized care included in the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines, sepsis remains a leading cause of death, and the prevalence of sepsis increases concurrent with the aging process. The diagnosis of sepsis was originally based on the evidence of persistent bacteremia (septicemia) but was modified in 1992 to incorporate systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). Since then, SIRS has become the gold standard for the diagnosis of sepsis. In 2016, the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine published a new clinical definition of sepsis that is called Sepsis-3. In contrast to previous definitions, Sepsis-3 is based on organ dysfunctions and uses a sequential organ failure (SOFA) score as an index. Thus, patients diagnosed with respect to Sepsis-3 will inevitably represent a different population than those previously diagnosed. We assume that this drastic change in clinical definition will affect not only clinical practice but also the viewpoint and focus of basic research. This review intends to summarize the pathophysiology of sepsis and organ dysfunction and discusses potential directions for future research.

Background The need to engage medical students in understanding the social and environmental determinants of health in disparate communities is increasing. However, previous reviews have noted the limited community diagnosis programs and program evaluation. Given the feasibility of the programs, it is expected to be widely available online. Therefore, this study used a realist approach to identify learning patterns through an online community diagnosis program, namely context (C), mechanism (M), and outcomes (O) patterns. Methods A 2-week general medicine clinical practice program was conducted for 4 th - and 5 th -year medical students at a medical university in Japan. The program included a one-hour zoom-based lecture, feedback for students on their presentations on community diagnosis, and a structural report on community diagnosis. We developed the program based on variation theory, which views discernment and variation in situations having time, space, and social dimensions as core learning. The students' reflections on their learning through the program were thematically analyzed through CMO perspectives. The realist approach used in the online diagnosis program evaluation allows us to explore, test, and refine what mechanisms work under what conditions (context) and with what interventions (including opportunities and resources), from which we can describe iteratively explainable results. Results First, the medical students, who spent most of their time in the limited residential areas they lived in, discovered the characteristics of their own community by discovery learning and comparison among peers. Second, they increased their intrinsic interest in the community by discerning specific issues in their familiar community through community diagnosis. Third, they valued community diagnosis by identifying relationships between local data on health issues under their learning responsibility. Fourth, they become more flexible in their thinking and created new knowledge that would fit the local community, and their reflection on themselves was encouraged. Conclusion In this online community diagnosis program, medical students learned about the community through four types of learning patterns. Medical students may develop an understanding of community with interest using variation theory as a program development perspective and cognitive flexibility theory surrounding the essential ambiguity and abstraction of community.

Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) reportedly has a low performance for distinguishing infection from non-infection. We explored the distribution of the patients diagnosed by SIRS (SIRS patients) or a quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) (qSOFA patients) and confirmed the performance of the both for predicting ultimate infection after hospital admission. We retrospectively analyzed the data from a multicenter prospective study. When emergency physicians suspected infection, SIRS or the qSOFA were applied. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) was used to assess the performance of the SIRS and qSOFA for predicting established infection. A total of 1,045 patients were eligible for this study. The SIRS patients accounted for 91.6% of qSOFA patients and they showed a higher rate of final infection than that of non-SIRS patients irrespective of the qSOFA diagnosis. The AUCs for predicting infection with SIRS and a qSOFA were 0.647 and 0.582, respectively. The SIRS significantly predicted an ultimate infection (AUC, 0.675; p = 0.018) in patients who met the SIRS and qSOFA simultaneously. In conclusion, the SIRS patients included almost all qSOFA patients. SIRS showed a better performance for predicting infection for qSOFA in those who met both definitions.

Background Sepsis is a leading cause of death and long-term disability in developed countries. A comprehensive report on the incidence, clinical characteristics, and evolving management of sepsis is important. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients with severe sepsis in Japan. Methods This is a cohort study of the Focused Outcomes Research in Emergency Care in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Sepsis, and Trauma (FORECAST) study, which was a multicenter, prospective cohort study conducted at 59 intensive care units (ICUs) from January 2016 to March 2017. We included adult patients with severe sepsis based on the sepsis-2 criteria. Results In total, 1184 patients (median age 73 years, interquartile range (IQR) 64–81) with severe sepsis were admitted to the ICU during the study period. The most common comorbidity was diabetes mellitus (23%). Moreover, approximately 63% of patients had septic shock. The median Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score was 9 (IQR 6–11). The most common site of infection was the lung (31%). Approximately 54% of the participants had positive blood cultures. The compliance rates for the entire 3-h bundle, measurement of central venous pressure, and assessment of central venous oxygen saturation were 64%, 26%, and 7%, respectively. A multilevel logistic regression model showed that closed ICUs and non-university hospitals were more compliant with the entire 3-h bundle. The in-hospital mortality rate of patients with severe sepsis was 23% (21–26%). Older age, multiple comorbidities, suspected site of infection, and increasing SOFA scores correlated with in-hospital mortality, based on the generalized estimating equation model. The length of hospital stay was 24 (12–46) days. Approximately 37% of the patients were discharged home after recovery. Conclusion Our prospective study showed that sepsis management in Japan was characterized by a high compliance rate for the 3-h bundle and low compliance rate for central venous catheter measurements. The in-hospital mortality rate in Japan was comparable to that of other developed countries. Only one third of the patients were discharged home, considering the aging population with multiple comorbidities in the ICUs in Japan. Trial registration UMIN-CTR, UMIN000019742 . Registered on 16 November 2015.

ObjectiveThis study aimed to identify associations between multimorbidity and subjective health outcomes among the very old persons, after adjusting for coexisting conditions such as frailty and depression.Study setting and participantsThis was an observational cross-sectional study involving 1012 independent, community-dwelling very old persons (507 men, 505 women; aged 85–89 years) in Kawasaki city, Japan.Outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the cross-sectional associations between multimorbidity and poor self-rated health (SRH) and life satisfaction using binary logistic regression. The secondary outcome was the association of subjective health with each chronic condition.ResultsThe prevalence of multimorbidity (≥2 conditions) was 94.7%, and the average number of chronic conditions was 4.47±1.9. Multimorbidity was significantly associated with poor SRH in the adjusted model only when six or more chronic conditions were present (OR 4.80; 95% CI 1.34 to 17.11; p=0.016). Cerebrovascular disease, heart disease, respiratory disease, connective tissue disease and arthritis showed significant associations with poor SRH after multivariate adjustment. Sex-specific analysis replicated associations between multimorbidity with six or more conditions and SRH in both men and women, while the diseases with the greatest impact on SRH differed between men and women. Most conditions were not associated with low satisfaction with life scale, with the exception of arthritis (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.78, p=0.001).ConclusionsMultimorbidity is prevalent in the independent, community-dwelling very old persons and is associated with poor SRH when six or more conditions are present; conditions causing mobility limitations, such as cerebrovascular disease, connective tissue disease and arthritis, have a negative impact on SRH.Trial registration numberUMIN000026053.

Background Elderly patients have a blunted host response, which may influence vital signs and clinical outcomes of sepsis. This study was aimed to investigate whether the associations between the vital signs and mortality are different in elderly and non-elderly patients with sepsis. Methods This was a retrospective observational study. A Japanese multicenter sepsis cohort (FORECAST, n  = 1148) was used for the discovery analyses. Significant discovery results were tested for replication using two validation cohorts of sepsis (JAAMSR, Japan, n  = 624; SPH, Canada, n  = 1004). Patients were categorized into elderly and non-elderly groups (age ≥ 75 or < 75 years). We tested for association between vital signs (body temperature [BT], heart rate, mean arterial pressure, systolic blood pressure, and respiratory rate) and 90-day in-hospital mortality (primary outcome). Results In the discovery cohort, non-elderly patients with BT < 36.0 °C had significantly increased 90-day mortality ( P  = 0.025, adjusted hazard ratio 1.70, 95% CI 1.07–2.71). In the validation cohorts, non-elderly patients with BT < 36.0 °C had significantly increased mortality (JAAMSR, P  = 0.0024, adjusted hazard ratio 2.05, 95% CI 1.29–3.26; SPH, P  = 0.029, adjusted hazard ratio 1.36, 95% CI 1.03–1.80). These differences were not observed in elderly patients in the three cohorts. Associations between the other four vital signs and mortality were not different in elderly and non-elderly patients. The interaction of age and hypothermia/fever was significant ( P  < 0.05). Conclusions In septic patients, we found mortality in non-elderly sepsis patients was increased with hypothermia and decreased with fever. However, mortality in elderly patients was not associated with BT. These results illuminate the difference in the inflammatory response of the elderly compared to non-elderly sepsis patients.

Previous studies have shown inconsistent prognostic accuracy for mortality with both quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) and the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria. We aimed to validate the accuracy of qSOFA and the SIRS criteria for predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with suspected infection in the emergency department. A prospective study was conducted including participants with suspected infection who were hospitalised or died in 34 emergency departments in Japan. Prognostic accuracy of qSOFA and SIRS criteria for in-hospital mortality was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. Of the 1060 participants, 402 (37.9%) and 915 (86.3%) had qSOFA ≥ 2 and SIRS criteria ≥ 2 (given thresholds), respectively, and there were 157 (14.8%) in-hospital deaths. Greater accuracy for in-hospital mortality was shown with qSOFA than with the SIRS criteria (AUROC: 0.64 versus 0.52, difference + 0.13, 95% CI [+ 0.07, + 0.18]). Sensitivity and specificity for predicting in-hospital mortality at the given thresholds were 0.55 and 0.65 based on qSOFA and 0.88 and 0.14 based on SIRS criteria, respectively. To predict in-hospital mortality in patients visiting to the emergency department with suspected infection, qSOFA was demonstrated to be modestly more accurate than the SIRS criteria albeit insufficiently sensitive. Clinical Trial Registration: The study was pre-registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000027258).

Dysglycemia is frequently observed in patients with sepsis. However, the relationship between dysglycemia and outcome is inconsistent. We evaluate the clinical characteristics, glycemic abnormalities, and the relationship between the initial glucose level and mortality in patients with sepsis. This is a retrospective sub-analysis of a multicenter, prospective cohort study. Adult patients with severe sepsis (Sepsis-2) were divided into groups based on blood glucose categories (<70 (hypoglycemia), 70-139, 140-179, and ≥180 mg/dL), according to the admission values. In-hospital mortality and the relationship between pre-existing diabetes and septic shock were evaluated. Of 1158 patients, 69, 543, 233, and 313 patients were categorized as glucose levels <70, 70-139, 140-179, ≥180 mg/dL, respectively. Both the Acute Physiological and Chronic Health Evaluation II and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores on the day of enrollment were higher in the hypoglycemic patients than in those with 70-179 mg/dL. The hepatic SOFA scores were also higher in hypoglycemic patients. In-hospital mortality rates were higher in hypoglycemic patients than in those with 70-139 mg/dL (26/68, 38.2% vs 43/221, 19.5%). A significant relationship between mortality and hypoglycemia was demonstrated only in patients without known diabetes. Mortality in patients with both hypoglycemia and septic shock was 2.5-times higher than that in patients without hypoglycemia and septic shock. Hypoglycemia may be related to increased severity and high mortality in patients with severe sepsis. These relationships were evident only in patients without known diabetes. Patients with both hypoglycemia and septic shock had an associated increased mortality rate.