BACKGROUND:Sepsis is an acute, life-threatening multiple organ dysfunction triggered by an infection. METHODS:This guideline is an update of the S3 guideline "Sepsis-prevention, diagnosis, therapy, and follow-up care" (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaft [AMWF] Registry No. 079-001) of the German Sepsis Society (DSG) dated 31 December 2018. The update of the "Surviving sepsis campaign (SSC): international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021" dated 4 October 2021, was used as the reference guideline. The DSG Guideline Commission compared each recommendation on the underlying PICO questions of the DSG Guideline 2018 (literature search until December 2018) with those of the SSC Guideline 2021 (literature search until July 2019) and evaluated the newly available published data (literature search until December 2024) by means of systematic update searches and literature reviews in compliance with the rules of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system and the AWMF. RESULTS:A total of 88 PICO questions were addressed, including those related to the diagnosis and treatment of infection and organ failure. Of these, two were agreed upon as statements, 29 as expert consensus, and 57 as evidence-based recommendations (26 with a strong and 31 with a weak recommendation grade). Compared to the previous 2018 guideline, 43 recommendations were reviewed but retained, 16 recommendations were modified, and 29 recommendations were newly issued. CONCLUSION:Given the lack of evidence for numerous measures for the inpatient care of patients with sepsis or septic shock, old and new knowledge gaps were revealed. Among the evidence-based recommendations, the underlying GRADE quality of evidence was high for only 5 recommendations, moderate for 18 recommendations, low for 17 recommendations, and very low for 16. These evidence gaps can only be closed through future multicenter, noncommercial clinical trials. The update to the S3 guideline on sepsis includes some updates to the recommendations of the previous guideline. These updates will need to be incorporated into some of the case- and facility-specific quality assurance indicators of quality assurance (QA) procedure 2025. Impairments in health-related quality of life for survivors must be given greater focus in outpatient care.

OBJECTIVE:To assess the relationship between body mass index (BMI, i.e., kg/m2) and mortality in ICU patients with intra-abdominal infection or sepsis. METHODS:This is a secondary analysis from AbSeS, an international, observational cohort study including patients with intra-abdominal infection (n = 2588). Patients were classified as underweight (BMI < 18.5), normal weight (BMI 18.5-24.9), overweight (BMI 25-29.9), or obese (BMI ≥ 30). Independent relationships with mortality were assessed by logistic and Cox regression. Results reported as odds ratios (OR) or hazard ratios (HR) 95 % and confidence interval (CI). Sensitivity analyses were performed for age (<65 or ≥ 65 years), sex, and sepsis or septic shock. RESULTS:Overall mortality was 29.1 %. Logistic regression showed underweight to be associated with increased mortality (OR 1.76, 95 % CI 1.12-2.78), while obesity was independently associated with a decreased mortality risk compared to normal weight patients (OR 0.75, 95 % CI 0.58-0.97). Mortality in overweight patients was not different from patients with a normal weight. In patients < 65 years, the association with underweight remained, while obesity was no longer associated with decreased mortality. All significant relationships between BMI and mortality disappeared when only considering patients ≥ 65 years. Underweight was associated with increased mortality in patients with sepsis, but not in septic shock. In Cox regression, underweight remained an independent risk factor for death (HR 1.72, 95 % CI 1.25-2.35), whereas obesity was no longer associated with a decreased mortality risk. CONCLUSION:In the context of intra-abdominal infection in ICU patients, underweight is independently associated with increased mortality. The possible association of obesity with decreased mortality risk is less robust. IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE:Nutritional screening should be part of preoperative evaluation in elective abdominal surgery. If undernutrition is identified, targeted nutritional support should be initiated early to improve postoperative resilience and potentially reduce mortality risk in case of critical illness.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW:To present the current knowledge and recent developments regarding intravenous perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) for patients undergoing abdominal surgery who are colonized with multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GN). RECENT FINDINGS:Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a frequent cause of postoperative morbidity and mortality in abdominal surgery. PAP is one of the key measures to reduce SSI rates. The number of patients colonized with MDR-GN is increasing globally. Recent evidence indicates that the combination of risk-adapted screening and targeted prophylaxis in patients being colonized with MDR-GN and undergoing elective abdominal surgery can substantially decrease SSI rates. Preoperative decolonization procedures have not been shown to be effective so far. SUMMARY:In cases of proven MDR-GN colonization, targeted prophylaxis reduces postoperative SSI rates in abdominal surgery. Further clinical research is necessary to more accurately define the risk collectives for MDR-GN colonization in order to optimize screening procedures and effectiveness of targeted prophylaxis. Furthermore, clinical research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of innovative decolonization procedures and specific antibiotics to be used for targeted PAP in patients colonized with carbapenem-resistant bacteria.

Sepsis ist eine akut lebensbedrohliche multiple Organdysfunktion, ausgelöst durch eine Infektion. Bei der vorliegenden Leitlinie handelt es sich um ein Update der S3-Leitlinie „Sepsis – Prävention, Diagnose, Therapie und Nachsorge“ (AMWF-Register-Nr.: 079–001) der Deutschen Sepsis-Gesellschaft (DSG) vom 31.12.2018. Dabei wurde das Update der „Surviving sepsis campaign (SSC): international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021“ vom 04.10.2021 als Referenzleitlinie zugrunde gelegt. Die DSG-Leitlinienkommission verglich jede Empfehlung zu den zugrunde liegenden PICO-Fragen der DSG-Leitlinie 2018 (Literaturrecherche bis 12/2018) mit denen der SSC-Leitlinie 2021 (Literaturrecherche bis 07/2019) und bewertete die in der Zwischenzeit neu verfügbare publizierte Datenlage (Literaturrecherche bis 12/2024) mittels systematischer Aktualisierungsrecherchen und Literaturbewertungen unter Befolgung des Regelwerkes des GRADE-Systems und der AWMF. Insgesamt wurden 88 PICO-Fragen u. a. zur Diagnose und Therapie der Infektion und des Organversagens adressiert. Davon wurden 2 als Statements, 29 als Expertenkonsens und 57 als evidenzbasierte Empfehlungen (26 mit starkem und 31 mit schwachem Empfehlungsgrad) konsentiert. Im Vergleich zur Vorgänger-Leitlinie 2018 wurden 43 Empfehlungen überprüft, aber beibehalten. 16 Empfehlungen wurden geändert, und 29 Empfehlungen wurden neu ausgesprochen. Angesichts fehlender Evidenz für zahlreiche Maßnahmen zur stationären Versorgung von Patienten mit Sepsis oder septischem Schock wurden alte und neue Wissenslücken offenbart. Bei den evidenzbasierten Empfehlungen war die zugrunde liegende Evidenzqualität nach GRADE nur bei 5 Empfehlungen hoch, bei 18 Empfehlungen moderat, bei 17 Empfehlungen niedrig und bei 16 sehr niedrig. Diese Evidenzlücken können nur durch zukünftige multizentrische, nichtkommerzielle klinische Prüfungen geschlossen werden. Das Update der S3-Leitlinie Sepsis beinhaltet einige Aktualisierungen zu Empfehlungen der Vorgängerleitlinie. Diese Aktualisierungen werden in einige der fall- und einrichtungsbezogenen QS-Indikatoren des QS-Verfahrens 2025 einfließen müssen. Beeinträchtigungen in der gesundheitsbezogenen Lebensqualität müssen bei Überlebenden mehr in den Fokus der ambulanten Versorgung gerückt werden.

Background Necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTI) are rare and life-threatening bacterial infections characterized by necrosis of subcutaneous tissue, fascia, or muscle. Few prospective studies have been conducted. The primary objective is to assess the 90-day mortality rate and to identify prognostic factors in patients with NSTI in an international setting. Secondary objectives are i) to characterize the clinical and microbiological presentation and management; ii) to assess the risk of limb amputation and associated factors; and iii) to assess functional and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes and associated factors. Methods We are conducting a multinational, prospective, non-interventional cohort study. We plan to enroll 1,033 consecutive patients admitted to 85 hospitals with surgically proven NSTI between November 2021 and December 2024 in 17 countries over three continents. Data will be collected prospectively on a secure web-based server. The primary outcome measure will be the day-90 mortality. Secondary outcomes include need for limb amputation, the activity of daily living scale and health-related quality of life at day-90 (EQ-5D-5L questionnaire). Baseline characteristics associated with outcomes will be identified by multivariable analyses. Exploratory analyses will be conducted to assess the impact of therapeutic interventions on day-90 mortality and secondary outcomes. The study protocol has been approved by an ethics committee in each participating country.

We compared epidemiology of intra-abdominal infection (IAI) between immunocompromised and non-immunocompromised ICU patients and identified risk factors for mortality. We performed a secondary analysis on the "AbSeS" database, a prospective, observational study with IAI patients from 309 ICUs in 42 countries. Immunocompromised status was defined as either neutropenia or prolonged corticosteroids use, chemotherapy or radiotherapy in the past year, bone marrow or solid organ transplantation, congenital immunodeficiency, or immunosuppressive drugs use. Mortality was defined as ICU mortality at any time or 28-day mortality for those discharged earlier. Associations with mortality were assessed by logistic regression. The cohort included 2589 patients of which 239 immunocompromised (9.2 %), most with secondary peritonitis. Among immunocompromised patients, biliary tract infections were less frequent, typhlitis more frequent, and IAIs were more frequently healthcare-associated or early-onset hospital-acquired compared with immunocompetent patients. No difference existed in grade of anatomical disruption, disease severity, organ failure, pathogens, and resistance patterns. Septic shock was significantly more frequent in the immunocompromised population. Mortality was similar in both groups (31.1% vs. 28.9 %; p = 0.468). Immunocompromise was not a risk factor for mortality (OR 0.98, 95 % CI 0.66-1.43). Independent risk factors for mortality among immunocompromised patients included septic shock at presentation (OR 6.64, 95 % CI 1.27-55.72), and unsuccessful source control with persistent inflammation (OR 5.48, 95 % CI 2.29-12.57). In immunocompromised ICU patients with IAI, short-term mortality was similar to immunocompetent patients, despite the former presented more frequently with septic shock, and septic shock and persistent inflammation after source control were independent risk factors for death.

Background: Postoperative surgical site infections (SSI) account for almost 25% of all nosocomial infections in Germany and are a source of increased morbidity and mortality. Method: This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed and on national and international guidelines. Results: The individual risk factors for SSI must be assessed before any surgical procedure. A body -mass index above 30 kg/m2 is associated with an unadjusted risk ratio of 1.35 [1.28; 1.41] for SSI, which rises to 3.29 [2.99; 3.62] if the patient is also immunosuppressed. The risk of SSI is also significantly higher with certain types of procedure. Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) is clearly indicated for operations that carry a high risk of SSI (e.g., colorectal surgery) and for those that involve the implantation of alloplastic material (e.g., hip endoprostheses). PAP can usually be administered with basic antibiotics such as cefazoline. The basic principles of PAP are that it should be given by the anesthesia team in the interval from 60 minutes preoperatively up to shortly before the incision, and that its administration should only be for a short period of time, usually as a single shot. Continuing PAP onward into the postoperative period leads to increased toxicity, bacterial superinfections, and antibiotic resistance. Conclusion: The evidence shows that perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis is a component of a bundle of measures that can help prevent SSI. Strict indications and adherence to the basic principles of PAP are essential for therapeutic success.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW:This review comments on the current guidelines for the treatment of wound infections under definition of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). However, wound infections around a catheter, such as driveline infections of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) are not specifically listed under this definition in any of the existing guidelines. RECENT FINDINGS:Definitions and classification of LVAD infections may vary across countries, and the existing guidelines and recommendations may not be equally interpreted among physicians, making it unclear if these infections can be considered as ABSSSI. Consequently, the use of certain antibiotics that are approved for ABSSSI may be considered as 'off-label' for LVAD infections, leading to rejection of reimbursement applications in some countries, affecting treatment strategies, and hence, patients' outcomes. However, we believe driveline exit site infections related to LVAD can be included within the ABSSSI definition. SUMMARY:We argue that driveline infections meet the criteria for ABSSSI which would enlarge the 'on-label' antibiotic armamentarium for treating these severe infections, thereby improving the patients' quality of life.

Background: The AbSeS-classification defines specific phenotypes of patients with intra-abdominal infection based on the (1) setting of infection onset (community-acquired, early onset, or late-onset hospital-acquired), (2) presence or absence of either localized or diffuse peritonitis, and (3) severity of disease expression (infection, sepsis, or septic shock). This classification system demonstrated reliable risk stratification in intensive care unit (ICU) patients with intra-abdominal infection. This study aimed to describe the epidemiology of ICU patients with pancreatic infection and assess the relationship between the components of the AbSeS-classification and mortality. Methods: This was a secondary analysis of an international observational study (“AbSeS”) investigating ICU patients with intra-abdominal infection. Only patients with pancreatic infection were included in this analysis (n=165). Mortality was defined as ICU mortality within 28 days of observation for patients discharged earlier from the ICU. Relationships with mortality were assessed using logistic regression analysis and reported as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: The overall mortality was 35.2% (n=58). The independent risk factors for mortality included older age (OR=1.03, 95% CI: 1.0 to 1.1 P=0.023), localized peritonitis (OR=4.4, 95% CI: 1.4 to 13.9 P=0.011), and persistent signs of inflammation at day 7 (OR=9.5, 95% CI: 3.8 to 23.9, P<0.001) or after the implementation of additional source control interventions within the first week (OR=4.0, 95% CI: 1.3 to 12.2, P=0.013). Gram-negative bacteria were most frequently isolated (n=58, 49.2%) without clinically relevant differences in microbial etiology between survivors and non-survivors. Conclusions: In pancreatic infection, a challenging source/damage control and ongoing pancreatic inflammation appear to be the strongest contributors to an unfavorable short-term outcome. In this limited series, essentials of the AbSeS-classification, such as the setting of infection onset, diffuse peritonitis, and severity of disease expression, were not associated with an increased mortality risk.ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT03270345

SCOPE:The aim of these guidelines is to provide recommendations for decolonization and perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) in multidrug-resistant Gram-positive bacteria (MDR-GPB) adult carriers before inpatient surgery. METHODS:These European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases/European Committee on Infection Control guidelines were developed following a systematic review of published studies targeting methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), vancomycin-resistant enterococci, methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococci, and pan-drug-resistant-GPB. Critical outcomes were the occurrence of surgical site infections (SSIs) caused by the colonizing MDR-GPB and SSIs-attributable mortality. Important outcomes included the occurrence of SSIs caused by any pathogen, hospital-acquired infections, all-cause mortality, and adverse events associated with the interventions, including resistance development to the agents used and the incidence of Clostridioides difficile infections. The last search of all databases was performed on 1 November 2023. The level of evidence and the strength of each recommendation were defined according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Consensus of a multidisciplinary expert panel was reached for the final list of recommendations. Antimicrobial stewardship considerations were included. RECOMMENDATIONS:The guideline panel reviewed the impact of decolonization, targeted PAP, and combined interventions (e.g. decolonization and targeted PAP) on the risk of SSIs and other outcomes in MDR-GPB carriers, according to the type of bacteria and type of surgery. We recommend screening for S. aureus before high-risk operations, such as cardiothoracic and orthopaedic surgery. Decolonization with intranasal mupirocin with or without a chlorhexidine bath is recommended in patients colonized with S. aureus before cardiothoracic and orthopaedic surgery and suggested in other surgeries. The addition of vancomycin to standard prophylaxis is suggested for MRSA carriers in cardiothoracic surgery, orthopaedic surgery, and neurosurgery. Combined interventions (e.g. decolonization and targeted prophylaxis) are suggested for MRSA carriers undergoing cardiothoracic and orthopaedic surgery. No recommendation could be made regarding screening, decolonization and targeted prophylaxis for vancomycin-resistant enterococci because of the lack of data. No evidence was retrieved for methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococci and pan-drug-resistant-GPB. Careful consideration of the laboratory workload and involvement of antimicrobial stewardship and infection control teams are warranted before implementing screening procedures or performing changes in PAP policy. Future research should focus on novel decolonizing techniques, on the monitoring of resistance to decolonizing agents and PAP regimens, and on standardized combined interventions in high-quality studies.

This article addresses the question of the possible reuse of the mummy mask of Tutankhamun (Carter 256a). Recent publications have proposed that the mask was not originally made for Tutankhamun but was instead made for Ankhkheperure Neferneferuaten as co-regent with Akhenaten. As part of the preparations for Tutankhamun’s burial it was reworked to produce a likeness of its new owner. This process necessitated the replacement of the original sheet gold face with one depicting Tutankhamun’s features, and the erasure of Ankhkheperure Neferneferuaten’s name from the inscription on the left shoulder of the mask and its replacement with Tutankhamun’s. Technological and scientific data derived from two of the authors’ intensive study of the mask in 2015 allow this hypothesis to be tested. This article discusses the basic manufacturing process for the mask and the technical requirements for a theoretical reworking of face and inscription; an excursus considers the textual merits of the purported “original” inscription set against those of the existing, purported “usurped” one. The authors conclude that there are no solid grounds to view the mask as having been altered from one owner to another.

Zusammenfassung Die moderne Chirurgie ermöglicht immer komplexere operative Eingriffe bei immer älteren und komorbiden Patienten. Dies geht mit einem potenziell erhöhten Risiko für perioperative Infektionen (SSI) einher. Für deren Vermeidung sind Sauberkeit, Händedesinfektion und steriles Arbeiten essenziell, während einige traditionelle Hygienemaßnahmen zur Prävention untauglich sind. In diesem Beitrag werden Unterschiede der relevantesten Leitlinien zu SSI ggf. besonders herausgestellt.

Scope: The aim of the guidelines is to provide recommendations on perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (PAP) in adult inpatients who are carriers of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GNB) before surgery. Methods: These evidence-based guidelines were developed after a systematic review of published studies on PAP targeting the following MDR-GNB: extended-spectrum cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE), aminoglycoside-resistant Enterobacterales, fluoroquinolone-resistant Enterobacterales, cotrimoxazole-resistant Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB), extremely drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa, colistin-resistant Gram-negative bacteria, and pan-drug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. The critical outcomes were the occurrence of surgical site infections (SSIs) caused by any bacteria and/or by the colonizing MDR-GNB, and SSI-attributable mortality. Important outcomes included the occurrence of any type of postsurgical infectious complication, all-cause mortality, and adverse events of PAP, including development of resistance to targeted (culture-based) PAP after surgery and incidence of Clostridioides difficile infections. The last search of all databases was performed until April 30, 2022. The level of evidence and strength of each recommendation were defined according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Consensus of a multidisciplinary expert panel was reached for the final list of recommendations. Antimicrobial stewardship considerations were included in the recommendation development.

Antibiotics are recognized widely for their benefits when used appropriately. However, they are often used inappropriately despite the importance of responsible use within good clinical practice. Effective antibiotic treatment is an essential component of universal healthcare, and it is a global responsibility to ensure appropriate use. Currently, pharmaceutical companies have little incentive to develop new antibiotics due to scientific, regulatory, and financial barriers, further emphasizing the importance of appropriate antibiotic use. To address this issue, the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery established an international multidisciplinary task force of 295 experts from 115 countries with different backgrounds. The task force developed a position statement called WARNING (Worldwide Antimicrobial Resistance National/International Network Group) aimed at raising awareness of antimicrobial resistance and improving antibiotic prescribing practices worldwide. The statement outlined is 10 axioms, or "golden rules," for the appropriate use of antibiotics that all healthcare workers should consistently adhere in clinical practice.

Background Surgical site infections (SSI) present a substantial burden to patients and healthcare systems. This study aimed to elucidate the prevalence of SSIs in German hospitals and to quantify their clinical and economic burden based on German hospital reimbursement data (G-DRG). Methods This retrospective, cross-sectional study used a 2010–2016 G-DRG dataset to determine the prevalence of SSIs in hospital, using ICD-10-GM codes, after surgical procedures. The captured economic and clinical outcomes were used to quantify and compare resource use, reimbursement and clinical parameters for patients who had or did not have an SSI. Findings Of the 4,830,083 patients from 79 hospitals, 221,113 were eligible. The overall SSI prevalence for the study period was 4.9%. After propensity-score matching, procedure type, immunosuppression and BMI ≥30 were found to significantly affect the risk of SSI (p<0.001). Mortality and length of stay (LOS) were significantly higher in patients who had an SSI (mortality: 9.3% compared with 4.5% [p<0.001]; LOS (median [interquartile range, IQR]): 28 [27] days compared with 12 [8] days [p<0.001]). Case costs were significantly higher for the SSI group (median [IQR]) €19,008 [25,162] compared with € 9,040 [7,376] [p<0.001]). A median underfunding of SSI was identified at €1,534 per patient. Interpretation The dataset offers robust information about the “real-world” clinical and economic burden of SSI in hospitals in Germany. The significantly increased mortality of patients with SSI, and their underfunding, calls for a maximization of efforts to prevent SSI through the use of evidence-based SSI-reduction care bundles.

Objective: To describe epidemiology and age-related mortality in critically ill older adults with intraabdominal infection.Methods: A secondary analysis was undertaken of a prospective, multi-national, observational study (Abdominal Sepsis Study, ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT03270345) including patients with intra-abdominal infection from 309 intensive care units (ICUs) in 42 countries between January and December 2016. Mortality was considered as ICU mortality, with a minimum of 28 days of observation when patients were discharged earlier. Relationships with mortality were assessed by logistic regression analysis.Results: The cohort included 2337 patients. Four age groups were defined: middle-aged patients [reference category; 40-59 years; n = 659 (28.2%)], young-old patients [60-69 years; n = 622 (26.6%)], middle old patients [70-79 years; n = 667 (28.5%)] and very old patients [ >80 years; n = 389 (16.6%)]. Secondary peritonitis was the predominant infection (68.7%) and was equally prevalent across age groups. Mortality increased with age: 20.9% in middle-aged patients, 30.5% in young-old patients, 31.2% in middle-old patients, and 44.7% in very old patients ( P < 0.001). Compared with middle-aged patients, young-old age [odds ratio (OR) 1.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21-2.17], middle-old age (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.35-2.41) and very old age (OR 3.69, 95% CI 2.66-5.12) were independently associated with mortality. Other independent risk factors for mortality included late-onset hospital-acquired intra-abdominal infection, diffuse peritonitis, sepsis/septic shock, source control failure, liver disease, congestive heart failure, diabetes and malnutrition.Conclusions: For ICU patients with intra-abdominal infection, age > 60 years was associated with mortality; patients aged >80 years had the worst prognosis. Comorbidities and overall disease severity further compromised survival. As all of these factors are non-modifiable, it remains unclear how to improve outcomes.(c) 2022 Elsevier Ltd and International Society of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.