Talk:Early goal-directed therapy

Merge
I for one feel the EGDT is deserving of it's own article, and should not be merged with critical care medicine. EDGT is an important idea that is often discussed in medical settings, yes it falls under the category of critical care, but arguing to include it in the critical care article is like arguing that all antibiotics should be included in a single article.

Djkammer (talk) 06:37, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Agree it deserves its own article. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 22:22, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

As it currently stands, this article misrepresents what EGDT is as defined by Rivers et al. In 2001. The inclusion criteria is SIRS + lactate > 4 or systolic BP<  90 and was a trial that looked an initial treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock in the ED prior to hospital admission. Now, there may be other protocols referred to as EGDT that are specific to other domains, but the Rivers protocol is for sepsis out of the ED. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.128.48.227 (talk) 02:14, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Suggested reference
This fairly recent article might be of use in improving the article.

- - MrBill3 (talk) 00:54, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Surgery in sepsis?
I find this paragraph somewhat confusing:
 * Early goal-directed therapy is a more specific form of therapy used for the treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock. This approach involves adjustments of cardiac preload, afterload, and contractility to balance oxygen delivery with an increased oxygen demand before surgery

Why is surgery mentioned in relation to sepsis and septic shock? Or is the second sentence unrelated to the first and does not refer to EGT used in sepsis? Also, why does the first sentence claim that EGT is "more specific" -- more specific than what? AxelBoldt (talk) 02:29, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Good points, read the sources and edit appropriately. I think "a specific" and eliminating "before surgery" are needed edits. - - MrBill3 (talk) 06:34, 20 December 2014 (UTC)