# Clinical practice in using corticosteroids and adjunctive sepsis therapies at the bedside among European ICUs: an ESICM-endorsed survey

## TL;DR

This survey explores how European ICU doctors use additional treatments like corticosteroids and blood purification for sepsis, revealing wide variation in practice.

## Contribution

The study provides a comprehensive overview of real-world adjunctive sepsis therapy practices across European ICUs.

## Key findings

- Over 90% of clinicians use corticosteroids, mainly hydrocortisone, for septic shock.
- Extracorporeal blood purification is used by 75% of respondents, primarily hemoadsorption.
- Significant variability exists in the use and timing of adjunctive therapies despite limited evidence.

## Abstract

Sepsis and septic shock remain major causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and management is largely based on source control, antimicrobial therapy, and supportive care. Despite limited high-quality evidence, adjunctive therapies targeting the dysregulated host response involving immune dysfunction, coagulopathy, and endothelial injury, steroids, vasopressors, and adjunctive therapies are frequently used in clinical practice. This survey aimed to describe real-world patterns of sepsis therapy across Europe.

We conducted an open, web-based, multinational survey endorsed by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) and the Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care (SIAARTI). The survey was distributed through professional mailing lists, newsletters, and national society networks. A structured 30-item questionnaire collected information on respondent demographics, ICU characteristics, availability of adjunctive therapies, clinical indications, triggers for initiation, and duration of treatment. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. A total of 442 physicians completed the survey. Data were analyzed descriptively and are presented as proportions and frequencies.

More than 80% of respondents reported use of at least one adjunctive therapy for septic shock within the previous year. Corticosteroids were used by over 90% of clinicians, predominantly hydrocortisone for septic shock. Considerable variability was observed regarding indications, timing of initiation, and duration of therapy. Extracorporeal blood purification techniques were used by approximately 75% of respondents, most frequently hemoadsorption in patients with refractory shock; high cost and limited availability were the main barriers to broader implementation. Intravenous immunoglobulins were used by approximately one-third of clinicians, often guided by measured immunoglobulin levels or perceived immune dysfunction. Additional vasoactive and inotropic agents, including levosimendan, methylene blue, and beta-blockers, were employed in selected cases. In contrast, specific immunomodulatory therapies such as interleukin (IL)-1receptor antibodies were rarely used. Across all adjunctive strategies, marked heterogeneity in practice patterns was evident.

Adjunctive therapies are widely used in European ICUs, particularly in patients with severe or refractory sepsis, despite limited supporting evidence. The substantial variability in practice highlights ongoing clinical uncertainty and underscores the need for well-designed randomized trials to inform evidence-based and individualized treatment strategies.