Infection management in patients with sepsis and septic shock in resource-limited settings

Intensive Care Medicine - Tập 42 - Trang 2117-2118 - 2016
C. Louise Thwaites1,2, Ganbold Lundeg3, Arjen M. Dondorp4,5
1Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Hospital for Tropical Diseases, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
2Oxford Centre for Tropical Medicine and Global Health, Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, Oxford, UK
3Department of Critical Care Medicine, Mongolian National University of Medical Sciences, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia
4Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit (MORU), Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
5Department of Intensive Care, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Tài liệu tham khảo

Roshdy A (2016) Infection management in patients with sepsis and septic shock in resource-limited settings: focus on appropriate antimicrobial. Intensive Care Med. doi:10.1007/s00134-016-4473-6 Thwaites CL, Lundeg G, Dondorp AM, Sepsis in resource-limited settings–expert consensus recommendations group of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) and the Mahidol-Oxford Research Unit (MORU) in Bangkok, Thailand et al (2016) Recommendations for infection management in patients with sepsis and septic shock in resource-limited settings. Intensive Care Med. doi:10.1007/s00134-016-4415-3 Tanriover MD, Guven GS, Sen D et al (2006) Epidemiology and outcome of sepsis in a tertiary-care hospital in a developing country. Source Epidemiol Infect 134:315–322 Cheng B, Xie G, Yao S et al (2007) Epidemiology of severe sepsis in critically ill surgical patients in ten university hospitals in China. Crit Care Med 35:2538–2546 Khwannimit B, Bhurayanontachai R (2009) The epidemiology of, and risk factors for, mortality from severe sepsis and septic shock in a tertiary-care university hospital setting. Source Epidemiol Infect 137:1333–1341 Reddy EA, Shaw AV, Crump JA (2010) Community-acquired bloodstream infections in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Infect Dis 10:417–432