Sepsis-3: What is the Meaning of a Definition?

July 29, 2016 at 2:29 pm

Critical Care Medicine August 2016 V.44 N.8 P.1459–1460

Marshall, John C.

Departments of Surgery and Critical Care Medicine, Keenan Research Centre for Biomedical Science of the Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael’s Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

The recent publication of Sepsis-3–the latest iteration of an effort to define sepsis–has evoked an impressive response (1). To date it has been viewed more than one million times on the JAMA website, making it one of the most highly accessed articles there in recent years. It has also generated a flurry of commentaries–some supportive, some opposing, and almost all thoughtful (2–4). Indeed recognizing as the original paper did that the new definition is simply the next step in the evolution of a challenging process, the controversy is as important as the Sepsis-3 document in clarifying what has been accomplished and what remains undone.According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, a definition is “…an explanation of the meaning of a word…”. Sepsis to the Greeks denoted a range of processes characterized by putrefaction and a foul smell (5). With the identification of the pathogenic role of microorganisms in disease, sepsis has come to take on a meaning related to the consequences of infection. This meaning has changed as our understanding of the biology of infection and the host response has evolved. In the early 1970s, Stedman’s Medical Dictionary defined sepsis as “…the presence of pus-forming organisms in the bloodstream…”, however this definition rapidly became obsolete with the discovery that the adverse sequelae of infection arose through the activation of a host response, rather than as a consequence of the intrinsic toxicity of the microorganism or its products. A new definition was needed. In 1991, a consensus conference of the SCCM and ACCP suggested that sepsis is “…the systemic host response to invasive infection …” (6). Further cognizant of the fact that an identical clinical response could be evoked by non-infectious stimuli, they proposed a neologism, the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), to denote the response independent of its cause. Time and reflection rendered this definition inadequate…..




Entry filed under: Sepsis, Update.

HCV Crónica – Actualización de las Recomendaciones para el Tratamiento – Esquemas libres de Interferón Marzo 2016 Surviving Severe Sepsis: Is That Enough?


July 2016
« Jun   Aug »

Most Recent Posts

%d bloggers like this: