Cited by 638Sepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentNosocomial Infections in ICUAcute Kidney Injury Research

EPISEPSIS: a reappraisal of the epidemiology and outcome of severe sepsis in French intensive care units

The EPISEPSIS Study Group·2004·Intensive Care Medicine

Abstract

Objective Ten years ago 8.4% of patients in French intensive care units (ICUs) were found to have severe sepsis or shock and 56% died in the hospital. As novel therapies for severe sepsis are emerging, updated epidemiological information is required. Design and setting An inception cohort study conducted in 206 ICUs of randomly selected hospitals over a 2-week period in 2001, including all patients meeting criteria for clinically or microbiologically documented severe sepsis (with > or =1 organ dysfunction). Measurements and results Among 3738 admissions, 546 (14.6%) patients experienced severe sepsis or shock, of which 30% were ICU-acquired. The median age of patients was 65 years, and 54.1% had at least one chronic organ system dysfunction. The median (range) Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS II) and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) at onset of severe sepsis were 48 (2-129) and 9 (1-24), respectively. Mortality was 35% at 30 days; at 2 months the mortality rate was 41.9%, and 11.4% of patients remained hospitalized. The median (range) hospital stay was 25 (0-112) days in survivors and 7 (0-90) days in non-survivors. Chronic liver and heart failure, acute renal failure and shock, SAPS II at onset of severe sepsis and 24-h total SOFA scores were the independent risk factors most strongly associated with death. Conclusions Although the attack rate of severe sepsis in French ICUs appears to have increased over the past decade, its associated mortality has decrea…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00134-003-2121-4

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Different pathogens have different sensitivities to antibacterial drugs, characteristics of organ distribution and other biological behaviors, which lead to different clinical manifestations and prognoses.

    “It is well established that different pathogens have different sensitivities to antibacterial drugs, characteristics of organ distribution and other biological behaviors, which lead to different clinical manifestations and prognoses.13,14”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 36 · Cited by 638

Authors
The EPISEPSIS Study Group
Affiliations
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Henri-Mondor (FR)
Corresponding author
The EPISEPSIS Study Group
Venue
Intensive Care Medicine
Published
2004-04-01
Volume
30
Issue
4
Pages
580-588
ISSN
  • 0342-4642 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1238
OpenAlex
W2397664387
Cited by
638
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 43 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 29
FWCI
29.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Intensive Care Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Eli Lilly and Company
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Nosocomial Infections in ICU
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Acute Kidney Injury Research
Keywords
severe sepsis, septic shock, sepsis epidemiology, sepsis mortality, mortality risk factors, organ dysfunction, acute kidney injury, chronic liver disease, heart failure, length of hospital stay, resource utilization (health care)
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, France, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Male, Middle Aged, Prognosis, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, Sex Factors, Cohort Studies, Survival Rate, Multivariate Analysis, Sepsis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review