The clinical manifestations of sepsis were already known to Hippocrates (460–377 BC), who introduced the term ‘wound putrefaction’. In addition, the Persian ‘father of modern medicine’, Ibn Sina (also known as
Avicenna, AD 980–1037), observed that septicaemia was usually accompanied by fever. However, it was not until the 18th century that Louis Pasteur linked the decay of organic substances to the presence of bacteria and microorganisms, and Ignaz Semmelweis observed the significant effect of hygienic measures on decreasing the mortality of women during childbirth. In 1914, Hugo Schottmüller laid the foundations for a modern definition of sepsis and was the first to describe that the presence of an infection was a fundamental component of the disease. Decades later, the ideas of Lewis Thomas led to a turnaround in the understanding of sepsis by popularizing the theory that “…it is the [host] response … that makes the disease”
1. This theory resulted in a large number of experimental and clinical studies, which eventually shifted the focus of sepsis research from the infectious agent to the host immune response. Finally, the concept entered into daily clinical practice when Roger Bone and colleagues defined sepsis as a systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) that can occur during infection
2.
In the past, sepsis was commonly thought to be caused by overactivation of the innate immune system, and the ensuing pro-inflammatory cascade, in response to severe microbial infection or extensive tissue damage (such as caused by burns or multiple injuries)
2. Activation of the complement system and hyperactivation of cellular innate immune responses are associated with an excessive inflammatory response that characterizes sepsis. After being triggered by an overwhelming initial stimulus, neutrophils and macrophages produce and respond to cytokines, chemokines, complement-activation products and other mediators. This pro-inflammatory environment causes the release of powerful secondary mediators (such as lipid factors and reactive oxygen species) that further amplify the inflammatory process. The malfunction of regulatory mechanisms during sepsis can result in a loss of control of inflammation, eventually leading to host damage due to overzealous activation of the inflammatory response.
However, the failure of anti-inflammatory therapies for sepsis in clinical trials raised the question of whether mortality in sepsis actually derives from an uncontrolled pro-inflammatory response
3. Although some patients die during the initial, hyperinflammatory phase of sepsis, most patients succumb at later time points that are associated with a prolonged immunosuppressive state. Notably, neutrophils can undergo ‘immune paralysis’ during sepsis, which involves a complete shut-down of important intracellular signalling pathways, and dysfunction of the adaptive immune system is also an important contributing factor to the immunosuppression that is observed in the later stages of sepsis
4,5. T cells are thought to orchestrate the inflammatory response, particularly CD4
+ T helper 1 (T
H1) cells and T
H2 cells, which have distinct cytokine profiles. During sepsis, the adaptive immune response diverts from an initial T
H1-cell response (characterized by interferon-γ (IFNγ) and interleukin-12 (
IL-12) production) to a T
H2-cell response (characterized by
IL-4,
IL-5,
IL-10 and
IL-13 production), which can result in profound immunosuppression. The T
H1–T
H2- cells interact with cell paradigm that describes how T
H other immune cells has recently been expanded with the discovery of T
H17 cells, a subset of T
H cells that produces IL-17 (REF.
6). T
H17 cells are thought to be important for immunity to microorganisms that are not eliminated by T
H1- or T
H2-cell-mediated immune responses.
Increased levels of apoptosis in lymphocytes and dendritic cells (DCs) further contribute to the suppression of immune responses during sepsis (reviewed in REF.
4). In addition to causing a marked decrease in cell numbers, the apoptosis of lymphocytes and DCs contributes to immunoparalysis through the immunosuppressive effects of apoptotic cells. However, different types of immune cell receive different apoptotic signals during sepsis. In contrast to lymphocytes and DCs, the apoptosis of macrophages and neutrophils seems to be unaffected or even decreased during sepsis
7,8. Whereas the increased apoptosis of lymphocytes and DCs results in severe immunosuppression, which places the patient at risk of nosocomial infections, decreased neutrophil apoptosis increases the bystander damage caused by their pro-inflammatory activity. Recent data indicate that T-cell-mediated suppression of the early innate immune response is required to minimize damage to the host and maximize the host defence response
9.
There is now evidence that sepsis is a condition that affects not only the immune system but also other biological systems, such as the coagulation system and the autonomic nervous system (ANS)
10–12. In this Review, we describe the interplay between normally host-protective mechanisms that, through amplification or suppression during sepsis, can become instruments of harm. We discuss the mechanisms that initiate dys-regulation of the inflammatory response and describe the role of specific inflammatory mediators that act as ‘central hubs’ to connect the various components of this response. In addition, we describe the pathogenic roles of the plasmatic cascades (the coagulation, fibrinolysis and complement systems) and the recently recognized interactions that occur between them, as well as new insights regarding the influence of the ANS on the inflammatory response. To illustrate the complexity of the inflammatory response in sepsis, we highlight the multidirectional interactions between the various systems that contribute to sepsis pathogenesis in a complex ‘inflammatory network’.