» Articles » PMID: 24701398

Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock in the Elderly: An Overview

Overview
Specialty Critical Care
Date 2014 Apr 5
PMID 24701398
Citations 96
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The incidence of severe sepsis and septic shock is increasing in the older population leading to increased admissions to the intensive care units (ICUs). The elderly are predisposed to sepsis due to co-existing co-morbidities, repeated and prolonged hospitalizations, reduced immunity, functional limitations and above all due to the effects of aging itself. A lower threshold and a higher index of suspicion is required to diagnose sepsis in this patient population because the initial clinical picture may be ambiguous, and aging increases the risk of a sudden deterioration in sepsis to severe sepsis and septic shock. Management is largely based on standard international guidelines with a few modifications. Age itself is an independent risk factor for death in patients with severe sepsis, however, many patients respond well to timely and appropriate interventions. The treatment should not be limited or deferred in elderly patients with severe sepsis only on the grounds of physician prejudice, but patient and family preferences should also be taken into account as the outcomes are not dismal. Future investigations in the management of sepsis should not only target good functional recovery but also ensure social independence and quality of life after ICU discharge.

Citing Articles

Role of COX6C and NDUFB3 in septic shock and stroke.

Tian W, Zhang P, Yu N, Zhu J, Liu C, Liu X Open Med (Wars). 2024; 19(1):20241050.

PMID: 39655053 PMC: 11627056. DOI: 10.1515/med-2024-1050.


Beyond anti-inflammatory strategies: addressing immunosuppression with nanomaterials in sepsis treatment.

Wang Z, Wei P Front Immunol. 2024; 15:1500734.

PMID: 39624087 PMC: 11609208. DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1500734.


Cellular senescence in acute human infectious disease: a systematic review.

Miller W, Wallace S, Kamm W, Reardon E, Theis-Mahon N, Yousefzadeh M Front Aging. 2024; 5:1500741.

PMID: 39620151 PMC: 11604623. DOI: 10.3389/fragi.2024.1500741.


The Prospective Analysis of Biomarkers in Sepsis: Correlation With Clinical Outcomes.

Reddy V, Wante M, Nirhale D, Puvvada P, Gaudani R Cureus. 2024; 16(10):e70965.

PMID: 39507174 PMC: 11538440. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.70965.


Identification of a Susceptible and High-Risk Population for Postoperative Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome in Older Adults: Machine Learning-Based Predictive Model.

Mai H, Lu Y, Fu Y, Luo T, Li X, Zhang Y J Med Internet Res. 2024; 26:e57486.

PMID: 39501984 PMC: 11624453. DOI: 10.2196/57486.


References
1.
Wiener R, Wiener D, Larson R . Benefits and risks of tight glucose control in critically ill adults: a meta-analysis. JAMA. 2008; 300(8):933-44. DOI: 10.1001/jama.300.8.933. View

2.
Schneiderman L, Gilmer T, Teetzel H, Dugan D, Blustein J, Cranford R . Effect of ethics consultations on nonbeneficial life-sustaining treatments in the intensive care setting: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2003; 290(9):1166-72. DOI: 10.1001/jama.290.9.1166. View

3.
Hamel M, Teno J, Goldman L, Lynn J, Davis R, Galanos A . Patient age and decisions to withhold life-sustaining treatments from seriously ill, hospitalized adults. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to Understand Prognoses and Preferences for Outcomes and Risks of Treatment. Ann Intern Med. 1999; 130(2):116-25. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-130-2-199901190-00005. View

4.
Joynt G, Gomersall C, Tan P, Lee A, Cheng C, Wong E . Prospective evaluation of patients refused admission to an intensive care unit: triage, futility and outcome. Intensive Care Med. 2001; 27(9):1459-65. DOI: 10.1007/s001340101041. View

5.
Rady M, Johnson D . Hospital discharge to care facility: a patient-centered outcome for the evaluation of intensive care for octogenarians. Chest. 2004; 126(5):1583-91. DOI: 10.1378/chest.126.5.1583. View