Septic Shock: Difference between revisions

Line 9:

==Definition ==

Dr. Kumar would like to emphasize to collectors that SEPTIC SHOCK means shock is thought to be '''DRIVEN BY infection''' and not just associated with infection. Example, if someone has another obvious cause of shock with infection (like massive hemorrhage with it), that does not mean it is combined hemorrhagic and septic shock. Basically, septic shock should not be called if there is another obvious cause for shock.[[User:TOstryzniuk|Trish Ostryzniuk]] 18:23, 2012 June 11 (CDT)

Dr. Kumar would like to emphasize to collectors that SEPTIC SHOCK means shock is thought to be '''DRIVEN BY infection''' and not just associated with infection. Example, if someone has another obvious cause of shock with infection (like massive hemorrhage with it), that does not mean it is combined hemorrhagic and septic shock. Basically, septic shock '''should not be called''' if there is another obvious cause for shock.[[User:TOstryzniuk|Trish Ostryzniuk]] 18:23, 2012 June 11 (CDT)

*He has also advised that anyone who has shock due to liver failure, pancreatitis drug overdoses or burns '''WITHOUT overt evidence of major infection''' don't code as septic shock.[[User:TOstryzniuk|Trish Ostryzniuk]] 18:24, 2012 June 11 (CDT)

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 ==Definition ==
-Dr. Kumar would like to emphasize to collectors that SEPTIC SHOCK means shock is thought to be '''DRIVEN BY infection''' and not just associated with infection.  Example, if someone has another obvious cause of shock with infection (like massive hemorrhage with it), that does not mean it is combined hemorrhagic and septic shock.  Basically, septic shock should not be called if there is another obvious cause for shock.[[User:TOstryzniuk|Trish Ostryzniuk]] 18:23, 2012 June 11 (CDT)
+Dr. Kumar would like to emphasize to collectors that SEPTIC SHOCK means shock is thought to be '''DRIVEN BY infection''' and not just associated with infection.  Example, if someone has another obvious cause of shock with infection (like massive hemorrhage with it), that does not mean it is combined hemorrhagic and septic shock.  Basically, septic shock '''should not be called''' if there is another obvious cause for shock.[[User:TOstryzniuk|Trish Ostryzniuk]] 18:23, 2012 June 11 (CDT)
 *He has also advised that anyone who has shock due to liver failure, pancreatitis drug overdoses or burns '''WITHOUT overt evidence of major infection''' don't code as septic shock.[[User:TOstryzniuk|Trish Ostryzniuk]] 18:24, 2012 June 11 (CDT)