FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |   Search Term  Advanced Search

Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe

Previous Volume 358:188-190 January 10, 2008 Number 2 Next

	Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

	Full Text PDF PDA Full Text Purchase this article Add to Personal Archive Add to Citation Manager Notify a Friend E-mail When Cited E-mail When Letters Appear Related Article by Sprung, C. L. PubMed Citation

As the balance of evidence regarding corticosteroid treatment for septic shock shifts once again toward the negative, the study by Sprung et al.¹ in this issue of the Journal elicits a strong feeling of déjà vu. Will the historical fate of high-dose corticosteroids, which were largely abandoned when the benefit observed in early studies could not be replicated in larger trials,^2,3 now befall "physiologic-dose" corticosteroids?

The rationale for therapy with corticosteroids at a physiologic dose (i.e., 200 to 300 mg of hydrocortisone per day) originated in the observations that patients with septic shock who had a reduced response to corticotropin . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Source Information

From the George Institute for International Health, the University of Sydney, and the Royal North Shore Hospital — all in Sydney.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• (2008). Steroids in Septic Shock: Not Looking Good. JWatch Emergency Med. 2008: 1-1 [Full Text]  
• (2008). Adjunctive Therapy in Septic Shock and Severe Sepsis. JWatch Infect. Diseases 2008: 1-1 [Full Text]