Intensive Care Medicine

, Volume 43, Issue 5, pp 625–632 | Cite as

Fluid administration in severe sepsis and septic shock, patterns and outcomes: an analysis of a large national database

  • Paul E. MarikEmail author
  • Walter T. Linde-Zwirble
  • Edward A. Bittner
  • Jennifer Sahatjian
  • Douglas Hansell



The optimal strategy of fluid resuscitation in the early hours of severe sepsis and septic shock is controversial, with both an aggressive and conservative approach being recommended.


We used the 2013 Premier Hospital Discharge database to analyse the administration of fluids on the first ICU day, in 23,513 patients with severe sepsis and septic shock, who were admitted to an ICU from the emergency department. Day 1 fluid was grouped into categories 1 L wide, starting with 1–1.99 L up to ≥9 L, to examine the effect of day 1 fluids on patient mortality. We built binary response models for hospital mortality and the propensity for receiving more than 5 L of fluids on day 1, using patient age and acute conditions present on admission. Patients were grouped by the requirement for mechanical ventilation and the presence or absence of shock. We assessed trends in the difference between actual and expected mortality, in the low fluid range (1–5 L day 1 fluids) and the high fluid range (5 to ≥9 L day 1 fluids) categories, using weighted linear regression controlling for the effects of sample size and variation within the day 1 fluid category.


Day 1 fluid administration averaged 4.4 L being lowest in the group with no mechanical ventilation and no shock (3.6 L) and highest (5.4 L) in the group receiving mechanical ventilation and in shock. The administration of day 1 fluids was remarkably consistent on the basis of hospital size, teaching status, rural/urban location, and region of the country. The hospital mortality in the entire cohort was 25.8%, with a mean ICU and hospital length of stay of 5.1 and 9.1 days, respectively. In the entire cohort, low volume resuscitation (1–4.99 L) was associated with a small but significant reduction in mortality, of −0.7% per litre (95% CI −1.0%, −0.4%; p = 0.02). However, in patients receiving high volume resuscitation (5 to ≥9 L), the mortality increased by 2.3% (95% CI 2.0, 2.5%; p = 0.0003) for each additional litre above 5 L. Total hospital cost increased by $999 for each litre of fluid above 5 L (adjusted R 2 = 92.7%, p = 0.005).


The mean amount of fluid administered to patients with severe sepsis and septic shock in the USA during the first ICU day is less than that recommended by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines. The administration of more than 5 L of fluid during the first ICU day is associated with a significantly increased risk of death and significantly higher hospital costs.


Sepsis Septic shock Fluid administration Mortality National database 


Compliance with ethical standards


Data extracted from the Premier database (Premier, Inc) and data analysis was supported by Cheetah Medical Inc.

Conflicts of interest

Doctors Marik, Linde-Zwirble and Bittner have no conflicts to declare. Dr. Hansell and Ms. Sahatjian are employees of Cheetah Medical, the manufacturer of the NICOM hemodynamic device.

Supplementary material

134_2016_4675_MOESM1_ESM.docx (27 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 26 kb)
134_2016_4675_MOESM2_ESM.docx (21 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 21 kb)
134_2016_4675_MOESM3_ESM.docx (21 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOCX 21 kb)
134_2016_4675_MOESM4_ESM.docx (25 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (DOCX 25 kb)
134_2016_4675_MOESM5_ESM.docx (29 kb)
Supplementary material 5 (DOCX 28 kb)
134_2016_4675_MOESM6_ESM.docx (26 kb)
Supplementary material 6 (DOCX 26 kb)
134_2016_4675_MOESM7_ESM.docx (29 kb)
Supplementary material 7 (DOCX 28 kb)


  1. 1.
    Rivers E, Nguyen B, Havstad S, Ressler J, Muzzin A, Knoblich B, Peterson E, Tomlanovich M (2001) Early goal-directed therapy in the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. N Engl J Med 345:1368–1377CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dellinger RP, Carlet JM, Masur H, Gerlach H, Calandra T, Cohen J, Gea-Banacloche J, Keh D, Marshall JC, Parker MM, Ramsay G, Zimmerman JL, Vincent JL (2004) Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock. Intensive Care Med 30:536–555CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    (2015) Surviving Sepsis Campaign; 6 hour bundle revised. 4-9-2015. (Ref Type: Electronic Citation)
  4. 4.
    Marik PE, Lemson J (2014) Fluid responsiveness: an evolution of our understanding. Br J Anaesth 112:620–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marik PE, Monnet X, Teboul JL (2011) Hemodynamic parameters to guide fluid therapy. Ann Crit Care 1:1Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aya HD, Ster IC, Fletcher N, Grounds RM, Rhodes A, Cecconi M (2016) Pharmacodynamic analysis of a fluid challenge. Crit Care Med 44:880–891CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Glassford NJ, Eastwood GM, Bellomo R (2014) Physiological changes after fluid bolus therapy in sepsis: a systematic review of contemporary data. Crit Care 18:2557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nunes T, Ladeira R, Bafi A, de Azevedo L, Machado F, Freitas F (2014) Duration of hemodynamic effects of crystalloids in patients with circulatory shock after initial resuscitation. Ann Intensive Care 4:25CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marik PE (2014) The physiology of volume resuscitation. Curr Anesthesiol Rep 4:353–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marik PE (2014) Early management of severe sepsis: current concepts and controversies. Chest 145:1407–1418CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Marik PE (2016) Fluid responsiveness and the six guiding principles of fluid resuscitation. Crit Care Med 44:1920–1922CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Marik P, Bellomo R (2016) A rational apprach to fluid therapy in sepsis. Br J Anaesth 116:339–349CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yealy DM, Kellum JA, Huang DT, Barnato AE, Terndrup T, Wang HE, Hou PC, LoVecchio F (2014) A Randomized trial of protocol-based care for early septic shock. N Engl J Med 370:1683–1693CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Peake SL, Delasney A, Bailey M, Bellomo R, Cameron PA, Cooper J, Higgins AM (2014) Goal-directed resuscitation for patients with Early Septic Shock. N Engl J Med 371:1496–1506CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mouncey PR, Osborn TM, Power S, Harrison DA, Sadique MZ, Grieve RD, Jahan R, Harvey SE, Bell D, Bion J, Coats TJ, Singer M (2015) Trial of early, goal-directed resuscitation for septic shock. N Engl J Med 372:1301–1311CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Angus DC, Linde-Zwirble WT, Lidicker J, Clermont G, Carcillo J, Pinsky MR (2001) Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence, outcome and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med 29:1303–1310CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Deyo RA, Cherkin CD, Ciol MA (1992) Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 45:613–619CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smith SH, Perner A (2012) Higher vs. lower fluid volume for septic shock: clinical characteristics and outcome in unselected patients in a prospective, multicenter cohort. Crit Care 16:R76CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sadaka F, Juarez M, Naydenov S, O’Brien J (2014) Fluid resuscitation in septic shock: the effect of increasing fluid balance on mortality. J Intensive Care Med 29:213–217CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Acheampong A, Vincent JL (2015) A positive fluid balance is an independent prognostic factor in patients with sepsis. Crit Care 19:251CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kelm DJ, Perrin JT, Cartin-Cebra R, Gajic O, Schenck L, Kennedy CC (2015) Fluid overload in patients with severe sepsis and septic shock treated with Early-Goal Directed Therapy is associated with increased acute need for fluid-related medical interventions and hospital death. Shock 43:68–73CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Genga K, Russell JA (2016) Early liberal fluids for sepsis patients are harmful. Crit Care Med 44:2258–2262CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, Annane D, Gerlach H, Opal SM, Sevransky JE, Sprung CL, Douglas IS, Jaeschke R, Osborn TM, Nunnally ME, Townsend SR, Reinhart K, Kleinpell RM, Angus DC, Deutschman CS, Machado FR, Ruberfeld GD, Webb S, Beale RJ, Vincent JL, Moreno R (2013) Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock, 2012. Intensive Care Med 39:165–228CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bundgaard-Nielsen M, Secher NH, Kehlet H (2009) ‘Liberal’ vs. ‘restrictive’ perioperative fluid therapy–a critical assessment of the evidence. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 53:843–851CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Boyd JH, Forbes J, Nakada T, Walley KR, Russell JA (2011) Fluid resuscitation in septic shock: a positive fluid balance and elevated central venous pressure increase mortality. Crit Care Med 39:259–265CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rosenberg AL, Dechert RE, Park PK, Bartlett RH (2009) Review of a large clinical series: association of cumulative fluid balance on outcome in acute lung injury: a retrospective review of the ARDSnet tidal volume study cohort. J Intensive Care Med 24:35–46CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Micek SC, McEnvoy C, McKenzie M, Hampton N, Doherty JA, Kollef MH (2013) Fluid balance and cardiac function in septic shock as predictors of hospital mortality. Crit Care 17:R246CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sirvent JM, Ferri C, Baro A, Murcia C, Lorencio C (2015) Fluid balance in sepsis and septic shock as a determining factor of mortality. Am J Emerg Med 33:186–189CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vincent JL, Sakr Y, Sprung CL, Ranieri VM, Reinhart K, Gerlach H, Moreno R, Carlet J (2006) Sepsis in European intensive care units: results of the SOAP study. Crit Care Med 34:344–353CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    de Oliveira FS, Freitas FG, Ferreira EM, de Castro I, Bafi AT, Pontes de Azevedo LC, Machado FR (2015) Positive fluid balance as a prognostic factor for mortality and acute kidney injury in severe sepsis and septic shock. J Crit Care 30:97–101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Maitland K, Kiguli S, Opoka RO, Engoru C, Olupot-Olupot P, Akech SO, Nyeko R, Mtove G (2011) Mortality after fluid bolus in african children with severe infection. N Engl J Med 364:2483–2495CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hjortrup PB, Haase N, Bundgaard H, Thomsen SL, Winding R, Pettila V, Aaen A, Lodahl D, Berthelsen RE (2016) Restricting volumes of resuscitation fluid in adults with septic shock after initial management: the CLASSIC randomised, parallel-group, multicentre feasibility trial. Intensive Care Med 42:1695–1705CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Silversides JA, Major E, Ferguson AJ, Mann EE, McAuley DF, Marshall JC, Blackwood B, Fan E (2016) Conservative fluid management or deresuscitation for patients with sepsis or acute respiratory distress syndrome following the resuscitation phase of critical illness: a systematic review and meta-analysis. DOI, Intensive Care Med ePub. doi: 10.1007/s00134-016-4573-3 Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zampieri F, Ranzani O, Pontes Azevedo LC, Martins ID, Kellum JA, Liborio AB (2016) Lactated Ringer is associated with reduced mortality and less acute kidney injury in critically ill patients: a retrospective cohort analysis. Crit Care Med 44:2163–2170CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg and ESICM 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul E. Marik
    • 1
    Email author
  • Walter T. Linde-Zwirble
    • 2
  • Edward A. Bittner
    • 3
  • Jennifer Sahatjian
    • 4
  • Douglas Hansell
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care MedicineEastern Virginia Medical SchoolNorfolkUSA
  2. 2.Trexin ConsultingChicagoUSA
  3. 3.Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain MedicineMassachusetts General HospitalBostonUSA
  4. 4.Cheetah MedicalNewtonUSA

Personalised recommendations