Diagnosis for Septic Shock: A Comprehensive Guide for Healthcare Professionals

Introduction

Septic shock represents the most critical phase of sepsis, a condition along a spectrum of syndromes with varying patient outcomes. Characterized by alarmingly high mortality rates, septic shock arises as a dysregulated host response to infection, triggering both pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory pathways within the immune system. This complex reaction involves monocytes, macrophages, and neutrophils interacting with the endothelium via pathogen recognition receptors, unleashing a cascade of cytokines, proteases, kinins, reactive oxygen species, and nitric oxide. The endothelium, as the primary site of this response, not only sustains microvascular injury but also activates the coagulation and complement systems, exacerbating vascular damage and leading to capillary leakage. This sequence of events manifests clinically as the signs and symptoms of sepsis, culminating in septic shock. While early and appropriate interventions such as antimicrobial therapy, adherence to sepsis care bundles, and early goal-directed therapy have improved survival rates, timely diagnosis remains paramount in effectively managing and treating septic shock. This article offers a detailed exploration of septic shock diagnosis, evaluation, and management, emphasizing the crucial role of a collaborative interprofessional team in optimizing patient care.

Etiology of Septic Shock

The causative agents of septic shock are diverse, with bacterial infections predominating. The 2009 European Prevalence of Infection in Intensive Care (EPIC II) study highlighted gram-negative bacteria as the most frequent culprits, accounting for 62% of sepsis cases, followed by gram-positive bacteria at 47%. The increasing prevalence of gram-positive infections may be linked to more invasive medical procedures and a rise in nosocomial infections. Commonly isolated microorganisms include Staphylococcus aureus (20%), Pseudomonas species (20%), and Escherichia coli (16%). The respiratory system (42%), bloodstream (21%), and genitourinary tract (10%) are identified as the most frequent sites of infection. It is important to note that in over one-third of septic shock patients, blood cultures may yield negative results, underscoring the limitations of relying solely on culture-positive diagnoses.

A significant meta-analysis has demonstrated the influence of bacterial strain and infection site on patient mortality. Gram-negative infections were generally associated with higher mortality rates. However, specific gram-positive infections such as Acinetobacter bacteremia or Staphylococcus pneumonia also presented with substantial mortality (around 40%). Pseudomonal pneumonia exhibited the highest mortality rate, reaching up to 70%.

The rise of sepsis syndromes caused by multidrug-resistant bacteria, such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE), is a growing concern, with incidence rates reaching up to 25%. Viral and parasitic infections are less common, accounting for only 2% to 4% of septic shock cases.

Several risk factors can predispose individuals to developing septic shock, including:

• Diabetes mellitus
• Malignancy
• Chronic kidney disease
• Chronic liver disease
• Corticosteroid use
• Immunocompromised states
• Burns
• Major surgical procedures
• Trauma
• Indwelling catheters
• Prolonged hospital stays
• Hemodialysis
• Extremes of age

Epidemiology of Septic Shock

The incidence of septic shock is unfortunately on the rise, increasing by approximately 9% annually. Over the past decade, hospitalizations related to sepsis and severe sepsis in the United States have surged from around 600,000 to over 1,000,000 per year between 2000 and 2008. This trend has been accompanied by escalating healthcare costs, making sepsis the most expensive healthcare condition in the US in 2009, accounting for 5% of total hospital expenditures.

While the case fatality rate for sepsis has been declining due to advancements in management strategies promoted by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign, septic shock remains a leading cause of death in hospitalized patients. Data from the United States Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) between 2009 and 2012 indicated a decrease in mortality rates from 16.5% to 13.8%. However, severe sepsis still contributes significantly to in-hospital mortality. Notably, mortality rates can reach up to 25% in severe sepsis and 50% in septic shock. Overall mortality rates for sepsis syndromes can range from 30% to 50%, influenced by factors such as patient demographics (age, race, sex), comorbidities, and the presence of organ dysfunction. The severity and number of organ injuries are strong predictors of in-patient mortality, with respiratory, cardiovascular, hepatic, and neurologic failure being particularly significant.

Pathophysiology of Septic Shock

Septic shock represents the most severe point on a continuum of pathophysiological states that begins with systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and can progress to multiorgan dysfunction syndrome (MODS) and ultimately death.

Early diagnosis of septic shock hinges on recognizing the initial signs of inflammation, which include:

1. Fever (temperature > 38°C) or hypothermia (temperature < 36°C)
2. Tachycardia (heart rate > 90 beats/minute)
3. Tachypnea (respiratory rate > 20 breaths/minute)
4. Leukocytosis (WBC > 12,000/cu mm) or leukopenia (WBC < 4,000/cu mm) with or without bandemia (> 10%).

The presence of at least two of these clinical signs is diagnostic for systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). When SIRS is accompanied by a confirmed or suspected infection source, the clinical definition of sepsis is met.

The development of hypotension signifies a progression to severe sepsis, indicating inadequate tissue oxygenation to meet metabolic demands. This decline in peripheral vascular perfusion and oxygenation leads to cellular and metabolic disturbances, most notably a shift from aerobic to anaerobic respiration, resulting in lactic acidosis. Tissue hypoperfusion can also manifest as end-organ damage, indicated by pre-renal azotemia or elevated liver transaminases. Monitoring mixed venous oxygen saturation from a central line in the superior vena cava (SVC) can be valuable in assessing oxygen supply and demand during resuscitation.

Septic shock is defined as sepsis-induced hypotension that persists despite initial fluid resuscitation. It is characterized as a distributive shock state. Inflammatory mediators like histamine, serotonin, super-radicals, and lysosomal enzymes, released in response to bacterial endotoxins, cause a marked increase in capillary permeability and a decrease in peripheral vascular resistance. This leads to a reduction in both afterload and preload due to decreased venous return from fluid extravasation into the interstitial space (“third-spacing”). Initially, the body compensates for the reduced stroke volume with an elevated heart rate, resulting in compensated septic shock. This hyperdynamic state is a hallmark of early septic shock.

Clinically, patients in compensated septic shock may exhibit a dynamic precordium with tachycardia and bounding peripheral pulses. They may feel warm to the touch and have rapid capillary refill (“flash capillary refill”). This is often termed “warm shock.” As septic shock progresses to an uncompensated stage, increased catecholamine production leads to peripheral vasoconstriction as the body attempts to shunt blood away from non-vital tissues (gastrointestinal tract, kidneys, muscle, and skin) to prioritize vital organs (brain and heart). This stage is known as “cold shock.” Understanding this pathophysiological progression is critical for guiding appropriate and timely treatment interventions.

Functionally, septic shock is defined by persistent hypotension despite adequate fluid resuscitation with 60 to 80 mL/kg of crystalloid or colloid fluids. At this stage, prompt administration of vasoactive medications, such as beta-adrenergic or alpha-adrenergic agents, becomes essential. Continued organ dysfunction despite high-dose vasoactive support defines multiorgan dysfunction syndrome (MODS), which carries a very high mortality rate (up to 75%). The precise mechanisms predicting poor prognosis and death are complex, but imbalances in the immune response, such as exaggerated pro-inflammatory responses versus immunologic paralysis (predominant anti-inflammatory response), are thought to play a significant role.

History and Physical Examination for Septic Shock Diagnosis

Early Signs and Symptoms

The initial diagnosis of sepsis, and subsequently septic shock, often relies on recognizing early signs and symptoms. Sepsis is defined by SIRS in the presence of a suspected or confirmed infection. Therefore, early presentation of sepsis may include the following vital sign abnormalities:

• Fever (temperature > 38°C) or hypothermia (temperature < 36°C)
• Tachycardia (heart rate > 90 beats/minute in adults; > 2 standard deviations above normal for age in pediatrics)
• Tachypnea (respiratory rate > 20 breaths/minute in adults; > 2 standard deviations above normal for age in pediatrics)

Signs and Symptoms of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock

Severe sepsis is characterized by sepsis with evidence of end-organ dysfunction. At this stage, signs and symptoms may include:

• Altered mental status
• Oliguria or anuria
• Hypoxia
• Cyanosis
• Ileus

Patients progressing to septic shock will exhibit signs and symptoms of severe sepsis along with hypotension. In the early, “compensated” phase of septic shock, blood pressure may be maintained, but other signs of distributive shock may be present, such as warm extremities, rapid capillary refill (less than 1 second), and bounding pulses, indicative of “warm shock.” This stage can be potentially reversible with aggressive fluid resuscitation and vasoactive support.

As septic shock progresses to the uncompensated stage, hypotension develops, and patients may present with cool extremities, delayed capillary refill (more than 3 seconds), and weak (“thready”) pulses, characteristic of “cold shock.” If tissue hypoperfusion persists, shock can become irreversible, rapidly progressing to MODS and death.

Evaluation and Diagnostic Tests for Septic Shock

Laboratory Findings

Laboratory investigations play a crucial role in the diagnosis and assessment of septic shock. Common findings in sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock include:

• Hyperglycemia (glucose > 120 mg/dL)
• Leukocytosis (WBC > 12,000/mm3) or leukopenia (WBC < 4000/mm3)
• Bandemia (> 10% immature neutrophils)
• Elevated C-reactive protein or procalcitonin ( > 2 standard deviations above normal)
• Elevated mixed venous saturation ( > 70%)
• Reduced PaO2/FiO2 ratio ( < 300, indicating hypoxemia)
• Pre-renal azotemia (elevated blood urea nitrogen and creatinine)
• Coagulopathy (INR > 1.5 or PTT > 60 seconds)
• Thrombocytopenia (platelets < 100,000/mL)
• Hyperbilirubinemia (total bilirubin > 4 mg/dL)
• Lactic acidosis (lactate > 2 mmol/L)

Continuous cardiopulmonary monitoring is essential to closely observe vital signs. A thorough assessment of end-organ function and peripheral perfusion is necessary to determine the patient’s position on the sepsis continuum. This includes Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) assessment or mental status evaluation, urine output monitoring, and lactate or mixed venous saturation measurement (if a central line is in place).

Regardless of the stage of sepsis, all patients should have a complete blood count with differential (CBC-d), source cultures (blood, urine, tracheal aspirate if intubated, wound swabs), and urinalysis performed. Lumbar puncture may be indicated in specific situations, such as in patients with signs of encephalitis or meningitis or febrile infants under six weeks of age. Acute-phase reactants like C-reactive protein and procalcitonin can aid in differentiating bacterial from viral sepsis, with bacterial infections typically causing more pronounced elevations. A comprehensive chemistry panel with liver function tests, a disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) panel, and an arterial blood gas analysis provide further valuable information about the severity of sepsis.

At least two sets of blood cultures are recommended before initiating antibiotic therapy. However, it’s important to remember that blood cultures are positive in less than 40% of cases.

Imaging Studies

Chest X-rays can help identify pneumonia or acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Plain radiographs of extremities may reveal gas in tissues suggestive of necrotizing fasciitis. Ultrasound can be used to evaluate the gallbladder. Computed tomography (CT) scans of the abdomen are helpful in detecting abscesses, bowel perforation, or ischemia.

Treatment and Management of Septic Shock

The following treatment guidelines are based on the Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines.

Source Control

1. Prompt Antibiotic Administration: Broad-spectrum antibiotics should be administered within one hour of septic shock diagnosis to all patients. Initial empiric antibiotic therapy should target all likely pathogens and ensure adequate penetration into the suspected source tissue.
2. Surgical Source Control: Removal of infected or necrotic tissue is crucial if it is the source of septic shock. This may include debridement of cellulitis, drainage of abscesses, removal of infected devices, or debridement of purulent wounds.

Hemodynamic Support and Shock Management

1. Early Resuscitation: Management strategies are most effective when implemented within the first six hours of diagnosis.
2. Central Venous Pressure (CVP)的目标: Aim to restore CVP to 8-12 mmHg.
3. Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP)的目标: Aim to maintain MAP > 65 mmHg.
4. Venous Oxygen Saturation Targets: Restore superior vena cava oxygen saturation (ScvO2) to > 70% or mixed venous oxygen saturation (SvO2) to > 65%.
5. Fluid Resuscitation: Initiate fluid resuscitation with crystalloids (normal saline or lactated Ringer’s) and/or colloids (blood products) up to 80 mL/kg.
6. Mechanical Ventilation: Consider mechanical ventilation to reduce metabolic demand and improve oxygenation.
7. Vasoactive Agents: Initiate first-line vasoactive agents when fluid resuscitation is insufficient to achieve hemodynamic targets. Norepinephrine is generally preferred as the first-line agent in warm shock, while epinephrine may be considered in cold shock. Dopamine is generally not recommended as a first-line agent due to potential adverse effects on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis and potential immunologic dysfunction.

Enhancing Host Response

1. Corticosteroids: Corticosteroids (e.g., hydrocortisone) may be considered in patients with vasoactive-refractory septic shock or in those with low basal cortisol levels (< 150 μg/L).
2. Vasopressin: Vasopressin may be added in cases of vasoactive-refractory shock to further augment blood pressure.

While central venous catheters are not always mandatory for septic shock resuscitation, they provide accurate monitoring of CVP and mixed venous oxygen saturation. It is important to note that CVP and SvO2 measurements are most accurate when obtained from a central line positioned in the right atrium. Peripheral venous access can be utilized for vasoactive medication administration in many cases. Studies have shown that dopamine, norepinephrine, and phenylephrine can be safely administered peripherally, even at high doses.

Early goal-directed therapy (EGDT), as initially described, has not consistently demonstrated a survival benefit in more recent clinical trials. While EGDT protocols often involve increased fluid administration, red blood cell transfusions, and central line placement, current evidence suggests that maintaining adequate blood pressure is more critical for survival than achieving specific CVP or SvO2 targets, regardless of the fluid type or vasoactive agent used. However, the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines continue to recommend EGDT principles as a standard of care in managing severe sepsis and septic shock.

Arterial line placement is valuable in managing vasoactive-refractory shock, allowing for continuous blood pressure monitoring and frequent arterial blood gas analysis to assess tissue oxygenation and lactate levels.

Early enteral nutrition is recommended in septic shock patients to support gut mucosal integrity and prevent bacterial translocation from the gastrointestinal tract into the systemic circulation.

Differential Diagnosis of Septic Shock

The differential diagnosis of septic shock includes other conditions that can present with similar clinical features, such as:

• Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS)
• Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation (DIC)
• Other forms of distributive shock (e.g., neurogenic shock, anaphylactic shock)
• Hemorrhagic shock
• Adrenal crisis
• Cardiogenic shock
• Toxic shock syndrome
• Drug toxicity

Prognosis of Septic Shock

Septic shock remains a life-threatening condition with a high mortality rate, often exceeding 40% despite medical advancements. Prognosis is influenced by various factors, including the causative organism, antibiotic susceptibility, the number of organs affected by dysfunction, and patient age. The greater the number of SIRS criteria met, the poorer the prognosis tends to be. Tachypnea and altered mental status are significant predictors of adverse outcomes. Prolonged use of inotropic agents to maintain blood pressure is also associated with worse outcomes. Even among survivors, septic shock can lead to significant long-term functional and cognitive impairments.

Complications of Septic Shock

Septic shock can lead to a range of severe complications, including:

• Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS)
• Acute or chronic renal injury
• Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation (DIC)
• Mesenteric ischemia
• Acute liver failure
• Myocardial dysfunction
• Multiple organ failure

Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes in Septic Shock Management

Optimal management of septic shock necessitates a collaborative interprofessional team, including intensivists, critical care nurses, pharmacists, dietitians, and other specialists. Early diagnosis and prompt resuscitation to maintain end-organ perfusion are paramount. While the specific type of resuscitation fluid may be less critical, maintaining adequate perfusion pressure is key. Patients with septic shock are at high risk for complications, emphasizing the need for vigilant monitoring and preventative measures. Underlying conditions such as diabetes and renal or liver failure must be aggressively managed. Medications that suppress the immune system should be carefully reviewed and potentially discontinued when appropriate. Early enteral nutrition, guided by a dietitian, is beneficial. Nurses play a critical role in ensuring deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pressure ulcer prophylaxis, as well as meticulous catheter care to prevent infections. Pharmacists monitor culture results to optimize antibiotic therapy. All healthcare team members must adhere to aseptic techniques during procedures and practice diligent hand hygiene. Effective communication and coordination within the interprofessional team are essential to deliver optimal care and improve outcomes for patients with septic shock.

Patient outcomes in septic shock are influenced by factors such as age, pre-existing comorbidities, renal function, the need for dialysis, requirement for mechanical ventilation, and the individual patient’s response to treatment.

References

1.Nguyen HB, Rivers EP, Abrahamian FM, Moran GJ, Abraham E, Trzeciak S, Huang DT, Osborn T, Stevens D, Talan DA., Emergency Department Sepsis Education Program and Strategies to Improve Survival (ED-SEPSIS) Working Group. Severe sepsis and septic shock: review of the literature and emergency department management guidelines. Ann Emerg Med. 2006 Jul;48(1):28-54. [PubMed: 16781920]

2.Mayr FB, Yende S, Linde-Zwirble WT, Peck-Palmer OM, Barnato AE, Weissfeld LA, Angus DC. Infection rate and acute organ dysfunction risk as explanations for racial differences in severe sepsis. JAMA. 2010 Jun 23;303(24):2495-503. [PMC free article: PMC3910506] [PubMed: 20571016]

3.Vincent JL, Rello J, Marshall J, Silva E, Anzueto A, Martin CD, Moreno R, Lipman J, Gomersall C, Sakr Y, Reinhart K., EPIC II Group of Investigators. International study of the prevalence and outcomes of infection in intensive care units. JAMA. 2009 Dec 02;302(21):2323-9. [PubMed: 19952319]

4.Rangel-Frausto MS. The epidemiology of bacterial sepsis. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 1999 Jun;13(2):299-312, vii. [PubMed: 10340168]

5.Cohen J, Cristofaro P, Carlet J, Opal S. New method of classifying infections in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2004 Jul;32(7):1510-26. [PubMed: 15241096]

6.Annane D, Aegerter P, Jars-Guincestre MC, Guidet B., CUB-Réa Network. Current epidemiology of septic shock: the CUB-Réa Network. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2003 Jul 15;168(2):165-72. [PubMed: 12851245]

7.Martin GS, Mannino DM, Eaton S, Moss M. The epidemiology of sepsis in the United States from 1979 through 2000. N Engl J Med. 2003 Apr 17;348(16):1546-54. [PubMed: 12700374]

8.Elixhauser A, Friedman B, Stranges E. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Statistical Briefs [Internet]. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); Rockville (MD): Oct, 2011. Septicemia in U.S. Hospitals, 2009. [PubMed: 22049570]

9.Torio CM, Andrews RM. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Statistical Briefs [Internet]. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); Rockville (MD): Aug, 2013. National Inpatient Hospital Costs: The Most Expensive Conditions by Payer, 2011. [PubMed: 24199255]

10.Elfeky S, Golabi P, Otgonsuren M, Djurkovic S, Schmidt ME, Younossi ZM. The epidemiologic characteristics, temporal trends, predictors of death, and discharge disposition in patients with a diagnosis of sepsis: A cross-sectional retrospective cohort study. J Crit Care. 2017 Jun;39:48-55. [PubMed: 28199891]

11.Angus DC, Linde-Zwirble WT, Lidicker J, Clermont G, Carcillo J, Pinsky MR. Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence, outcome, and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med. 2001 Jul;29(7):1303-10. [PubMed: 11445675]

12.Liu V, Escobar GJ, Greene JD, Soule J, Whippy A, Angus DC, Iwashyna TJ. Hospital deaths in patients with sepsis from 2 independent cohorts. JAMA. 2014 Jul 02;312(1):90-2. [PubMed: 24838355]

13.Annane D, Bellissant E, Cavaillon JM. Septic shock. Lancet. 2005 Jan 1-7;365(9453):63-78. [PubMed: 15639681]

14.Bone RC, Balk RA, Cerra FB, Dellinger RP, Fein AM, Knaus WA, Schein RM, Sibbald WJ. Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Chest. 1992 Jun;101(6):1644-55. [PubMed: 1303622]

15.Hotchkiss RS, Karl IE. The pathophysiology and treatment of sepsis. N Engl J Med. 2003 Jan 09;348(2):138-50. [PubMed: 12519925]

16.Levy MM, Fink MP, Marshall JC, Abraham E, Angus D, Cook D, Cohen J, Opal SM, Vincent JL, Ramsay G., SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS. 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference. Crit Care Med. 2003 Apr;31(4):1250-6. [PubMed: 12682500]

17.Jones AE, Puskarich MA. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines 2012: update for emergency physicians. Ann Emerg Med. 2014 Jan;63(1):35-47. [PubMed: 24067755]

18.Rhodes A, Evans LE, Alhazzani W, Levy MM, Antonelli M, Ferrer R, Kumar A, Sevransky JE, Sprung CL, Nunnally ME, Rochwerg B, Rubenfeld GD, Angus DC, Annane D, Beale RJ, Bellinghan GJ, Bernard GR, Chiche JD, Coopersmith C, De Backer DP, French CJ, Fujishima S, Gerlach H, Hidalgo JL, Hollenberg SM, Jones AE, Karnad DR, Kleinpell RM, Koh Y, Lisboa TC, Machado FR, Marini JJ, Marshall JC, Mazuski JE, McIntyre LA, McLean AS, Mehta S, Moreno RP, Myburgh J, Navalesi P, Nishida O, Osborn TM, Perner A, Plunkett CM, Ranieri M, Schorr CA, Seckel MA, Seymour CW, Shieh L, Shukri KA, Simpson SQ, Singer M, Thompson BT, Townsend SR, Van der Poll T, Vincent JL, Wiersinga WJ, Zimmerman JL, Dellinger RP. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016. Crit Care Med. 2017 Mar;45(3):486-552. [PubMed: 28098591]

19.Rivers E, Nguyen B, Havstad S, Ressler J, Muzzin A, Knoblich B, Peterson E, Tomlanovich M., Early Goal-Directed Therapy Collaborative Group. Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med. 2001 Nov 08;345(19):1368-77. [PubMed: 11794169]

20.Ventura AM, Shieh HH, Bousso A, Góes PF, de Cássia F O Fernandes I, de Souza DC, Paulo RL, Chagas F, Gilio AE. Double-Blind Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial of Dopamine Versus Epinephrine as First-Line Vasoactive Drugs in Pediatric Septic Shock. Crit Care Med. 2015 Nov;43(11):2292-302. [PubMed: 26323041]

21.Annane D. Corticosteroids for septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2001 Jul;29(7 Suppl):S117-20. [PubMed: 11445745]

22.Annane D, Renault A, Bellissant E. Glucocorticoids with or without Fludrocortisone in Septic Shock. N Engl J Med. 2018 Aug 30;379(9):895-6. [PubMed: 30179381]

23.Cardenas-Garcia J, Schaub KF, Belchikov YG, Narasimhan M, Koenig SJ, Mayo PH. Safety of peripheral intravenous administration of vasoactive medication. J Hosp Med. 2015 Sep;10(9):581-5. [PubMed: 26014852]

24.Angus DC, Barnato AE, Bell D, Bellomo R, Chong CR, Coats TJ, Davies A, Delaney A, Harrison DA, Holdgate A, Howe B, Huang DT, Iwashyna T, Kellum JA, Peake SL, Pike F, Reade MC, Rowan KM, Singer M, Webb SA, Weissfeld LA, Yealy DM, Young JD. A systematic review and meta-analysis of early goal-directed therapy for septic shock: the ARISE, ProCESS and ProMISe Investigators. Intensive Care Med. 2015 Sep;41(9):1549-60. [PubMed: 25952825]

25.Osborn TM. Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock Trials (ProCESS, ARISE, ProMISe): What is Optimal Resuscitation? Crit Care Clin. 2017 Apr;33(2):323-344. [PubMed: 28284298]