Explore the vast range of titles available.

The World Health Organization has adopted a resolution on improving the prevention, diagnosis, and management of sepsis. Millions of lives can be saved if politicians, policymakers, health care administrators, researchers, and clinicians take coordinated actions.

BackgroundNeonates are at major risk of sepsis, but data on neonatal sepsis incidence are scarce. We aimed to assess the incidence and mortality of neonatal sepsis worldwide.MethodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. 13 databases were searched for the period January 1979–May 2019, updating the search of a previous systematic review and extending it in order to increase data inputs from low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We included studies on the population-level neonatal sepsis incidence that used a clinical sepsis definition, such as the 2005 consensus definition, or relevant ICD codes. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis on neonatal sepsis incidence and mortality, stratified according to sepsis onset, birth weight, prematurity, study setting, WHO region and World Bank income level.ResultsThe search yielded 4737 publications, of which 26 were included. They accounted for 2 797 879 live births and 29 608 sepsis cases in 14 countries, most of which were middle-income countries. Random-effects estimator for neonatal sepsis incidence in the overall time frame was 2824 (95% CI 1892 to 4194) cases per 100 000 live births, of which an estimated 17.6% 9 (95% CI 10.3% to 28.6%) died. In the last decade (2009–2018), the incidence was 3930 (95% CI 1937 to 7812) per 100 000 live births based on four studies from LMICs. In the overall time frame, estimated incidence and mortality was higher in early-onset than late-onset neonatal sepsis cases. There was substantial between-study heterogeneity in all analyses. Studies were at moderate to high risk of bias.ConclusionNeonatal sepsis is common and often fatal. Its incidence remains unknown in most countries and existing studies show marked heterogeneity, indicating the need to increase the number of epidemiological studies, harmonise neonatal sepsis definitions and improve the quality of research in this field. This can help to design and implement targeted interventions, which are urgently needed to reduce the high incidence of neonatal sepsis worldwide.

Keywords: Severe malnutrition, Children, Hypovolemic shock, Septic shock, Mortality, Myocardial function, Echocardiography, Fluid resuscitation, Low and middle income countries

Sepsis is a major contributor to the global burden of disease. The majority of sepsis cases and deaths are estimated to occur in low and middle-income countries. Barriers to reducing the global burden of sepsis include difficulty quantifying attributable morbidity and mortality, low awareness, poverty and health inequity, and under-resourced and low-resilience public health and acute health care delivery systems. Important differences in the populations at risk, infecting pathogens, and clinical capacity to manage sepsis in high and low-resource settings necessitate context-specific approaches to this significant problem. We review these challenges and propose strategies to overcome them. These strategies include strengthening health systems, accurately identifying and quantifying sepsis cases, conducting inclusive research, establishing data-driven and context-specific management guidelines, promoting creative clinical interventions, and advocacy.

Abstract When the fourth edition of the Brain Trauma Foundation's Guidelines for the Management of Severe Traumatic Brain Injury were finalized in late 2016, it was known that the results of the RESCUEicp (Trial of Decompressive Craniectomy for Traumatic Intracranial Hypertension) randomized controlled trial of decompressive craniectomy would be public after the guidelines were released. The guideline authors decided to proceed with publication but to update the decompressive craniectomy recommendations later in the spirit of “living guidelines,” whereby topics are updated more frequently, and between new editions, when important new evidence is published. The update to the decompressive craniectomy chapter presented here integrates the findings of the RESCUEicp study as well as the recently published 12-mo outcome data from the DECRA (Decompressive Craniectomy in Patients With Severe Traumatic Brain Injury) trial. Incorporation of these publications into the body of evidence led to the generation of 3 new level-IIA recommendations; a fourth previously presented level-IIA recommendation remains valid and has been restated. To increase the utility of the recommendations, we added a new section entitled Incorporating the Evidence into Practice. This summary of expert opinion provides important context and addresses key issues for practitioners, which are intended to help the clinician utilize the available evidence and these recommendations. The full guideline can be found at: https://braintrauma.org/guidelines/guidelines-for-the-management-of-severe-tbi-4th-ed#/.

Abstract The scope and purpose of this work is 2-fold: to synthesize the available evidence and to translate it into recommendations. This document provides recommendations only when there is evidence to support them. As such, they do not constitute a complete protocol for clinical use. Our intention is that these recommendations be used by others to develop treatment protocols, which necessarily need to incorporate consensus and clinical judgment in areas where current evidence is lacking or insufficient. We think it is important to have evidence-based recommendations to clarify what aspects of practice currently can and cannot be supported by evidence, to encourage use of evidence-based treatments that exist, and to encourage creativity in treatment and research in areas where evidence does not exist. The communities of neurosurgery and neuro-intensive care have been early pioneers and supporters of evidence-based medicine and plan to continue in this endeavor. The complete guideline document, which summarizes and evaluates the literature for each topic, and supplemental appendices (A-I) are available online at https://www.braintrauma.org/coma/guidelines.

ObjectivesTo develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for children (including infants, school-aged children, and adolescents) with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction.DesignA panel of 49 international experts, representing 12 international organizations, as well as three methodologists and three public members was convened. Panel members assembled at key international meetings (for those panel members attending the conference), and a stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in November 2018. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the chairs, co-chairs, methodologists, and group heads, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development process.MethodsThe panel consisted of six subgroups: recognition and management of infection, hemodynamics and resuscitation, ventilation, endocrine and metabolic therapies, adjunctive therapies, and research priorities. We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes question to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or as a best practice statement. In addition, “in our practice” statements were included when evidence was inconclusive to issue a recommendation, but the panel felt that some guidance based on practice patterns may be appropriate.ResultsThe panel provided 77 statements on the management and resuscitation of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction. Overall, six were strong recommendations, 49 were weak recommendations, and nine were best-practice statements. For 13 questions, no recommendations could be made; but, for 10 of these, “in our practice” statements were provided. In addition, 52 research priorities were identified.ConclusionsA large cohort of international experts was able to achieve consensus regarding many recommendations for the best care of children with sepsis, acknowledging that most aspects of care had relatively low quality of evidence resulting in the frequent issuance of weak recommendations. Despite this challenge, these recommendations regarding the management of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction provide a foundation for consistent care to improve outcomes and inform future research.

Sepsis is a life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by an aberrant host response to an infecting pathogen. Several international efforts have been launched to address its staggering burden and escalating costs. A disconnection occurs when translating current global, regional, and national estimates into local and subnational quantifications of their burden. Given the level of completeness of civil registration and vital statistics in Chile, an opportunity arose to calculate, rather than estimate, the burden of sepsis by subnational administrative division. Thus, for the first time, a data science-driven strategy is presented to quantify sepsis-related incidence and mortality from official datasets in this country. Moreover, given the high-throughput potential of the analysis, areas where sepsis-related mortality exceeded its incidence were identified by administrative division, age group, and individual cause of death, and ranked by the magnitude of the excess. Thus, a strategy to guide the efficient deployment of public health resources based on subnational burden is presented. Implementation of such a strategy may represent the key to tackling sepsis with a local-to-global perspective, especially in low- and middle-income countries.

Background Pediatric sepsis is a leading cause of global morbidity and mortality, yet high-resolution, granular subnational assessments remain scarce. Chile and Mexico are the only countries in Latin America that possess robust vital registration systems and open access databases with marginal levels of missing cases. This offers a unique opportunity to quantify the subnational burden of pediatric sepsis, identify healthcare system constrictions, and guide targeted public health interventions. Methods This retrospective longitudinal study analyzed official hospital discharge and non-fetal death records of pediatrics (< 10 years old) from Chile and Mexico between 2014 and 2024. Age-standardized incidence (ASIR) and mortality (ASMR) rates, standardized ratios, and the mortality-to-incidence ratio (MIR), were calculated to assess mortality relative to subnational hospital output. A novel dynamic risk stratification matrix was developed to classify ICD-10 sepsis-related causes into four risk/severity quadrants based on year-specific ASIR and MIR indicators. Results A total of 656,234 discharges and 2,035 deaths in Chile, and 964,452 discharges and 77,252 deaths in Mexico were analyzed. Subnational trends were highly heterogeneous. Chile exhibited a predominantly low pediatric MIR (median < 1%) with isolated hotspots with significant structural deviations to the North. High-severity sepsis causes in Chile were relatively rare. Conversely, Mexico displayed an alarmingly high MIR (median 7.2%), with systemic persistency in States such as Chiapas and Nuevo León. Strikingly, high-severity causes in Mexico ( e.g. , unspecified septicaemia, bacterial meningitis) were highly frequent, accounting for 88–97% of pediatric sepsis deaths. Furthermore, systemic instances of code-specific MIR > 1.0 in Mexico suggest significant health system fragmentation and decoupling of hospital discharge from vital statistic registries. Conclusions Pediatric sepsis in Latin America encompasses distinct realities, ranging from localized critical care gaps to high-lethality persistency. One-size-fits-all national policies may be inadequate. These findings advocate for precision public health, urging the deployment of decentralized, data-driven interventions and specialized resource allocation based on high-risk subnational hotspot identification.