Cited by 58Sepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentAbdominal Surgery and ComplicationsAcute Kidney Injury Research

Septic shock with no diagnosis at 24 hours: A pragmatic multicenter prospective cohort study.

Open access
Contou, Damien, Roux, Damien, Jochmans, Sébastien, Coudroy, Rémi, Guérot, Emmanuel, Grimaldi, David, Ricome, Sylvie, Maury, Eric +5 more·2016·Critical Care

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The lack of a patent source of infection after 24 hours of management of shock considered septic is a common and disturbing scenario. We aimed to determine the prevalence and the causes of shock with no diagnosis 24 hours after its onset, and to compare the outcomes of patients with early-confirmed septic shock to those of others. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, prospective, multicenter observational cohort study in ten intensive care units (ICU) in France. We included all consecutive patients admitted to the ICU with suspected septic shock defined by clinical suspicion of infection leading to antibiotic prescription plus acute circulatory failure requiring vasopressor support. RESULTS: A total of 508 patients were admitted with suspected septic shock. Among them, 374 (74 %) had early-confirmed septic shock, while the 134 others (26 %) had no source of infection identified nor microbiological documentation retrieved 24 hours after shock onset. Among these, 37/134 (28 %) had late-confirmed septic shock diagnosed after 24 hours, 59/134 (44 %) had a condition mimicking septic (septic shock mimicker, mainly related to adverse drug reactions, acute mesenteric ischemia and malignancies) and 38/134 (28 %) had shock of unknown origin by the end of the ICU stay. There were no differences between patients with early-confirmed septic shock and the remainder in ICU mortality and the median duration of ICU stay, of tracheal intubation and of vasopressor support. The multivariable Cox model showed that the risk of day-60 mortality did not differ between patients with or without early-confirmed septic shock. A sensitivity analysis was performed in the subgroup (n = 369/508) of patients meeting the Sepsis-3 definition criteria and displayed consistent results. CONCLUSIONS: One quarter of the patients admitted in the ICU with suspected septic shock had no infection identified 24 hours after its onset and almost half of them were eventually diagnosed with a septic shock mimicker. Outcome did not differ between patients with early-confirmed septic shock and other patients.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13054-016-1537-5

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Accurately diagnosing sepsis is challenging because sepsis can present subtly, and some presentations that first appear to be sepsis turn out to be non-infectious conditions.

    “Accurately diagnosing sepsis is challenging as sepsis can present in subtle ways, and some presentations that first appear to be sepsis turn out to be non-infectious conditions [90, 93, 107, 108].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 27 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Contou, D., Roux, D., Jochmans, S., Coudroy, R., Guérot, E., Grimaldi, D., Ricome, S., Maury, E., Plantefève, G., Mayaux, J., Mekontso Dessap, A., Brun-Buisson, C., & de Prost, N.
Affiliations
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Hôpital Louis-Mourier (FR)
  • Melun Hospital (FR)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Poitiers (FR)
  • Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (FR)
  • Hôpital André Mignot (FR)
  • Centre Hospitalier Victor Dupouy (FR)
Corresponding author
Contou, Damien
Venue
Critical Care
Published
2016-11-06
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
360-360
ISSN
1364-8535 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2548173065
Cited by
58
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
FWCI
4.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Critical Care (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Abdominal Surgery and Complications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Acute Kidney Injury Research
Keywords
septic shock, infection source, delayed diagnosis, adverse drug reactions, acute mesenteric ischemia, Sepsis-3, ICU mortality, vasopressor therapy, intensive care unit outcomes
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Critical Care, Female, France, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Male, Middle Aged, Mortality, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, Shock, Septic, Cohort Studies, Time-to-Treatment

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