Suppr超能文献

有何危害?排除脓毒症实践演变的风险与获益。

What's the harm? Risks and benefits of evolving rule-out sepsis practices.

机构信息

Department of Pediatrics, Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY, USA.

Departments of Pediatrics and Microbiology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

出版信息

J Perinatol. 2018 Jun;38(6):614-622. doi: 10.1038/s41372-018-0081-3. Epub 2018 Feb 26.

Abstract

Asymptomatic term and late-preterm newborns with risk factors for early onset sepsis commonly undergo laboratory evaluation and receive empiric antibiotic therapy. Some have challenged the rationale for current "rule-out sepsis" practices, arguing that they lead to unnecessary overtreatment and healthcare costs. A series of recent clinical studies has explored scheduled serial observations as an alternative to laboratory testing and empiric antibiotics for asymptomatic newborns with historical risk factors for sepsis. These studies have shared the conclusion that serial observation is safe and cost-effective for well-appearing term and late-preterm babies, but they are also somewhat speculative because culture-proven early onset sepsis is an extremely low prevalence diagnosis. Here, we review the evolving consensus of optimal rule-out sepsis practices. We examine chorioamnionitis as an example of a problematic risk factor that has contributed to the controversy surrounding this topic. We also discuss how introduction of online sepsis risk calculators has allowed more precise delineation of a patient's chances of developing culture-proven infection. Finally, we analyze existing data from published studies to estimate the number needed to harm (NNH) when an observation-based strategy is used instead of a risk-based approach. We conclude that, if harm is defined as death or serious sepsis complications such as hemodynamic instability or neurologic injury, the NNH is 1610, compared to an NNH of 7 and 2.9 for IV infiltrates and delayed breastfeeding, respectively-two common and potentially consequential complications of NICU admission for a rule-out sepsis. We believe that the differential between risk of serious harm from observing a well-appearing term or late-preterm newborn with risk factors for sepsis and the risk of less significant but common NICU complications argues in favor of the ongoing trend toward less aggressive management of newborns with sepsis risks.

摘要

无症状的足月和晚期早产儿,如果存在早发型败血症的风险因素,通常会接受实验室评估和经验性抗生素治疗。一些人对当前“排除败血症”的做法提出了质疑,认为这些做法会导致不必要的过度治疗和医疗保健费用。最近的一系列临床研究探讨了对有败血症病史风险的无症状新生儿,采用定期连续观察代替实验室检查和经验性抗生素治疗的方法。这些研究得出的结论是,对于外观良好的足月和晚期早产儿,连续观察是安全且具有成本效益的,但由于培养证实的早发型败血症的发病率极低,这些研究也存在一定的推测性。在这里,我们回顾了不断发展的优化排除败血症实践的共识。我们以绒毛膜羊膜炎为例,探讨了这个问题上存在争议的一个有问题的风险因素。我们还讨论了在线败血症风险计算器的引入如何能够更精确地确定患者发生培养证实感染的可能性。最后,我们分析了已发表研究中的现有数据,以估计在使用基于观察的策略而不是基于风险的方法时,需要治疗多少例患者才会出现危害(NNH)。我们得出的结论是,如果危害定义为死亡或严重败血症并发症,如血流动力学不稳定或神经损伤,那么 NNH 为 1610,而静脉输液渗漏和延迟母乳喂养的 NNH 分别为 7 和 2.9,这两种并发症是 NICU 因排除败血症而收治的常见且潜在严重的并发症。我们认为,与观察有败血症风险的外观良好的足月或晚期早产儿相比,严重危害的风险与不太严重但常见的 NICU 并发症的风险之间存在差异,这支持了对有败血症风险的新生儿采取不那么激进的管理方法的持续趋势。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验