English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

International guidelines concerning the management of patients with sepsis, septic shock and multiple organ failure make no reference to the nature of the infecting organism. Indeed, most clinical signs of sepsis are nonspecific. In contrast, in vitro data suggest that there are mechanistic differences between bacterial, viral and fungal sepsis, and imply that pathogenetic differences may exist between subclasses such as Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria. These differences are reflected in different cytokine profiles and mortality rates associated with Gram-positive and Gram-negative sepsis in humans. They also suggest that putative anti-mediator therapies may act differently according to the nature of an infecting organism. Data from some clinical trials conducted in severe sepsis support this hypothesis. It is likely that potential new therapies targeting, for example, Toll-like receptor pathways will require knowledge of the infecting organism. The advent of new technologies that accelerate the identification of infectious agents and their antimicrobial sensitivities may allow better tailored anti-mediator therapies and administration of antibiotics with narrow spectra and known efficacy.

Bench-to-bedside review: Sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock – does the nature of the infecting organism matter?