No abstract

Background Timely administration of antibiotics is one of the most important interventions in reducing mortality in sepsis. However, administering antibiotics within a strict time threshold in all patients suspected with sepsis will require huge amount of effort and resources and may increase the risk of unintentional exposure to broad-spectrum antibiotics in patients without infection with its consequences. Thus, controversy still exists on whether clinicians should target different time-to-antibiotics thresholds for patients with sepsis versus septic shock. Methods This study analyzed prospectively collected data from an ongoing multicenter cohort of patients with sepsis identified in the emergency department. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were compared for in-hospital mortality of patients who had received antibiotics within 1 h to that of those who did not. Spline regression models were used to assess the association of time-to-antibiotics as continuous variables and increasing risk of in-hospital mortality. The differences in the association between time-to-antibiotics and in-hospital mortality were assessed according to the presence of septic shock. Results Overall, 3035 patients were included in the analysis. Among them, 601 (19.8%) presented with septic shock, and 774 (25.5%) died. The adjusted OR for in-hospital mortality of patients whose time-to-antibiotics was within 1 h was 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61–0.99; p = 0.046). The adjusted OR for in-hospital mortality was 0.66 (95% CI 0.44–0.99; p = 0.049) and statistically significant in patients with septic shock, whereas it was 0.85 (95% CI 0.64–1.15; p = 0.300) in patients with sepsis but without shock. Among patients who received antibiotics within 3 h, those with septic shock showed 35% (p = 0.042) increased risk of mortality for every 1-h delay in antibiotics, but no such trend was observed in patients without shock. Conclusion Timely administration of antibiotics improved outcomes in patients with septic shock; however, the association between early antibiotic administration and outcome was not as clear in patients with sepsis without shock.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether administration of a vasopressor within 1 hour of first fluid loading affected mortality and organ dysfunction in septic shock patients. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, observational study. SETTING: Sixteen tertiary or university hospitals in the Republic of Korea. PATIENTS: Patients with septic shock (n = 415) were classified into early and late groups according to whether the vasopressor was initiated within 1 hour of the first resuscitative fluid load. Early (n = 149) patients were 1:1 propensity matched to late (n = 149) patients. INTERVENTIONS: None. Measurement and Main Results: The median time from the initial fluid bolus to vasopressor was shorter in the early group (0.3 vs 2.3 hr). There was no significant difference in the fluid bolus volume within 6 hours (33.2 vs 35.9 mL/kg) between the groups. The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score and lactate level on day 3 in the ICU were significantly higher in the early group than that in the late group (Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, 9.2 vs 7.7; lactate level, 2.8 vs 1.7 mmol/L). In multivariate Cox regression analyses, early vasopressor use was associated with a significant increase in the risk of 28-day mortality (hazard ratio, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.26–2.65). CONCLUSIONS: Vasopressor initiation within 1 hour of fluid loading was associated with higher 28-day mortality in patients with septic shock.