Aetiology and outcomes of sepsis in adults in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

64 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Aetiology and outcomes of sepsis in sub-Saharan Africa (sSA) are poorly described; we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarise the available data.

METHODS

Systematic searches of PubMed and Scopus were undertaken to identify prospective studies recruiting adults (> 13 years) with community-acquired sepsis in sSA post-2000. Random effects meta-analysis of in-hospital and 30-day mortality was undertaken and available aetiology data also summarised by random effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies of 2800 participants were identified. Inclusion criteria were heterogeneous. The majority of patients were HIV-infected, and Mycobacterium tuberculosis was the most common cause of blood stream infection where sought. Pooled in-hospital mortality for Sepsis-2-defined sepsis and severe sepsis was 19% (95% CI 12-29%) and 39% (95% CI 30-47%) respectively, and sepsis mortality was associated with the proportion of HIV-infected participants. Mortality and morbidity data beyond 30 days were absent.

CONCLUSIONS

Sepsis in sSA is dominated by HIV and tuberculosis, with poor outcomes. Optimal antimicrobial strategies, including the role of tuberculosis treatment, are unclear. Long-term outcome data are lacking. Standardised sepsis diagnostic criteria that are easily applied in low-resource settings are needed to establish an evidence base for sepsis management in sSA.

Original languageEnglish
Article number212
Pages (from-to)212
JournalCritical Care
Volume23
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 11 Jun 2019

Keywords

  • Africa south of the Sahara
  • Bloodstream infection
  • HIV
  • Sepsis
  • Tuberculosis

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Aetiology and outcomes of sepsis in adults in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this