Alverdy John
The University of Chicago Division of the Biological Sciences, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Trauma Surg Acute Care Open. 2025 Mar 4;10(1):e001733. doi: 10.1136/tsaco-2024-001733. eCollection 2025.
Despite its many definitions and revisions, consensus statements and clinical guidelines, the term 'sepsis' continues to be referred to as a discrete clinical entity that is often claimed to be a direct cause of mortality. The assertion that sepsis can be defined as a 'life-threatening organ dysfunction caused by a dysregulated host response to infection,' has led to a field dominated by failed clinical trials informed by host-centered, pathogen-agnostic, animal experiments in which animal models do not recapitulate the clinical condition. The observations from the National Health Service from England that claim that 77.5% of sepsis deaths occur in those aged 75 years or older and those from the USA indicating that most patients dying sepsis have also been diagnosed with 'hospice qualifying conditions,' seem to refute the assertion that sepsis is caused by, rather than associated with, a 'dysregulated host response.' This piece challenges the current conceptual framework that forms the basis of the sepsis definition. Here we posit that as a result of both its definition and the use of inappropriate animal models, ineffective clinical treatments continue to be pursued in this field.
尽管有众多定义、修订、共识声明和临床指南,但“脓毒症”一词仍被视为一种独立的临床实体,常被认为是直接的死亡原因。脓毒症可被定义为“宿主对感染的反应失调导致的危及生命的器官功能障碍”,这一论断使得该领域充斥着以宿主为中心、不考虑病原体的动物实验所主导的失败临床试验,而这些动物模型并不能重现临床状况。英国国家医疗服务体系的观察结果表明,77.5%的脓毒症死亡发生在75岁及以上人群中,而美国的相关观察结果显示,大多数死于脓毒症的患者也被诊断出患有“临终关怀资格条件”,这些似乎都反驳了脓毒症是由“宿主反应失调”导致而非与之相关的论断。本文对构成脓毒症定义基础的当前概念框架提出了质疑。我们在此认为,由于其定义以及不恰当动物模型的使用,该领域仍在追求无效的临床治疗方法。