Pathophysiology and Early Recognition of Sepsis in Critically Ill Patients

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36557/2674-8169.2025v7n12p613-631

Keywords:

Sepsis, Pathophysiology, Early Recognition

Abstract

Introduction: Sepsis remains one of the leading causes of mortality in intensive care units in Brazil and worldwide, accounting for approximately 11 million deaths annually and a lethality rate exceeding 40% in severe cases. Late diagnosis is the main determinant of poor prognosis, making early recognition imperative. Methodology: Narrative review of articles published between 2015 and 2025, selected from the PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, SciELO, and LILACS databases, prioritizing experimental studies, high-impact reviews, and international consensus statements (Sepsis-3), without a formal systematic search. Pathophysiology: sepsis results from a dysregulated inflammatory response to infection, with a cytokine storm, immunothrombosis, and, subsequently, profound immunoparalysis with lymphocyte apoptosis and elevated PD-L1 expression. Early Recognition: qSOFA and SOFA remain the most widely used clinical criteria, but with limitations in sensitivity and delay. Promising biomarkers include Ang-2, Syndecan-1, NETs, absolute lymphocyte count, miRNAs, lactation-related genes, and artificial intelligence/machine learning models. Discussion: The integration of pathophysiology and diagnostic tools allows sepsis to be identified before obvious organ failure, but gaps remain in validation in underrepresented populations, limited access to advanced testing in Brazil, and false alarms in AI systems. Conclusion: The future of sepsis diagnosis lies in the combination of simple clinical signs, biomarkers of endothelial damage, and artificial intelligence. Until advanced resources are widely available, continuous training of teams and rigorous use of qSOFA/SOFA and existing protocols remain the most effective and realistic strategies for reducing high mortality from sepsis in the Brazilian context.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

ALVES, B. M. et al. Use of artificial intelligence for sepsis risk prediction after flexible ureteroscopy: a systematic review. Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões, v. 50, e20233561, 2023.

ARORA, J.; MENDELSON, A.; FOX-ROBICHAUD, A. Sepsis: network pathophysiology and implications for early diagnosis. American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology, v. 324, p. R613-R624, 2023.

AUGUSTINHO, F. C. Aplicabilidade dos critérios SEPSIS-3 e qSOFA em pacientes com cirrose hospitalizados por infecção bacteriana. 2018. Dissertação (Mestrado em Ciências Médicas) – Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, 2018.

SOUZA, D. C. DE . et al.. Improving the outcomes of sepsis in Brazil: strategies and initiatives. Critical Care Science, v. 37, p. e20250313, 2025.

FRIGHETTO, V. Avaliação dos escores SOFA, qSOFA e critérios da SRIS em pacientes sépticos internados em uma UTI: associação com desfechos clínicos. 2018. Dissertação (Mestrado em Enfermagem) – Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, 2018.

GIMENEZ, F. M. P. et al. Análise do escore SOFA, quick-SOFA e critérios SIRS em pacientes queimados e com infecção. Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem, v. 78, e20240111, 2025.

JARCZAK, D.; KLUGE, S.; NIERHAUS, A. Sepsis-pathophysiology and therapeutic concepts. Frontiers in Medicine, Lausanne, v. 8, 628302, 2021.

JORDÃO, V. N. et al. Sepse: uma discussão sobre as mudanças de seus critérios diagnósticos. Brazilian Journal of Health Review, v. 2, n. 2, p. 1294-1312, 2019.

LI, S. et al. Exploring the prognostic and diagnostic value of lactylation-related genes in sepsis. Scientific Reports, v. 14, 23130, 2024.

MACHADO, F. R. et al. The epidemiology of sepsis in Brazilian intensive care units (the Sepsis Prevalence Assessment Database, SPREAD): an observational study. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, v. 17, n. 11, p. 1180-1189, 2017.

MARTINELLI, S. S.; CAVALLI, S. B. Alimentação saudável e sustentável: uma revisão narrativa sobre desafios e perspectivas. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, Rio de Janeiro, v. 24, n. 11, p. 4251-4262, 2019.

PLATA-MENCHACA, E. P.; RUIZ-RODRÍGUEZ, J. C.; FERRER, R. Early diagnosis of sepsis: the role of biomarkers and rapid microbiological tests. Seminars in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, 2024.

RODRIGUES, T. et al. Mobilização passiva precoce aumenta a resposta de reatividade vascular em pacientes graves com sepse: um estudo quase-experimental. Revista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem, Ribeirão Preto, v. 34, 2022.

ROTHER, E. T. Revisão sistemática X revisão narrativa. Acta Paulista de Enfermagem, São Paulo, v. 20, n. 4, p. v-vi, 2007.

SINGER, M. et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA, Chicago, v. 315, n. 8, p. 801-810, 2016.

TANG, F. et al. Endothelial dysfunction: pathophysiology and therapeutic targets for sepsis-induced multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy, v. 178, 117180, 2024.

VALSAMAKI, A. et al. Immune dysregulation in sepsis: a narrative review for the clinicians. Biomedicines, v. 13, n. 10, 2386, 2025.

WIERSINGA, W. J.; VAN DER POLL, T. Immunopathophysiology of human sepsis. eBioMedicine, v. 86, 104363, 2022.

YANG, J. et al. The application of artificial intelligence in the management of sepsis. Medical Review, v. 3, n. 5, p. 369-380, 2023.

ZHANG, J. et al. Early identification and diagnosis, pathophysiology, and treatment of sepsis-related acute lung injury: a narrative review. Journal of Thoracic Disease, v. 16, n. 8, p. 5457-5476, 2024.

Published

2025-12-09

How to Cite

Silva, V. A. V., Silva, T. M. da, Silva, I. C. da, & Vieira, M. A. (2025). Pathophysiology and Early Recognition of Sepsis in Critically Ill Patients. Brazilian Journal of Implantology and Health Sciences, 7(12), 613–631. https://doi.org/10.36557/2674-8169.2025v7n12p613-631