Long-term survival in patients discharged alive from hospital following an intensive care unit admission with sepsis or septic shock in Australia and New Zealand: an observational cohort study

Background Data on long-term survival after intensive care unit (ICU) admission for sepsis and septic shock are limited. This study aimed to evaluate survival over five years among critically ill sepsis or septic shock patients discharged alive from hospital. Methods This retrospective cohort study of adults who survived to hospital discharge after non-elective ICU admission (2018–2024) used Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database. Sepsis, septic shock, or non-sepsis patients were classified using diagnostic codes and physiological/laboratory criteria during first 24-h of ICU admission. Mixed-effects Cox models with time-varying covariate effects were used, adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, frailty, illness severity, and ICU interventions. Findings Of 557,538 hospital survivors, 7.3% had sepsis without shock, 11.5% septic shock, and 81.2% non-sepsis conditions. At five-years, unadjusted survival was lowest for septic shock (68.0%, 95% confidence interval/CI = 67.6–68.4%), sepsis without shock (74.2%, 73.7–74.6%), and non-sepsis (78.2%, 78.1–78.3%). After adjustment, hazards ratio/HR for sepsis without shock remained at or below the null relative to non-sepsis; 0–1 year: HR=0.95, 0.92–0.98; 1–3 years: 0.96, 0.93–1.00; 3–5 years: 1.03, 0.97–1.08, while septic shock showed persistent independent excess mortality; 0–1 year: HR=1.05,1.03–1.08; 1–3 years: 1.03, 1.00–1.06; and 3–5 years:1.09,1.05–1.14. Major predictors of mortality included age, frailty, comorbidities, and organ support. Interpretation Septic shock was associated with persistent independent excess mortality over five years after hospital discharge, whereas in sepsis without shock, this was largely explained by pre-existing comorbidity and frailty. Funding Medical Research Future Fund.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Lancet Regional Health - Western Pacific
Published
2026-06-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanwpc.2026.101912
Primary Topic
Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Long-term survival in patients discharged alive from hospital following an intensive care unit admission with sepsis or septic shock in Australia and New Zealand: an observational cohort study

Win Wah, Andrew Alexander Udy, Paul Jeffrey Young, Anthony Delaney et al.
The Lancet Regional Health - Western Pacific
Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Long-term survival in patients discharged alive from hospital following an intensive care unit admission with sepsis or septic shock in Australia and New Zealand: an observational cohort study

Win Wah, Andrew Alexander Udy, Paul Jeffrey Young, Anthony Delaney, Ary Serpa Neto, Alisa M. Higgins, Lewis Campbell, Sandra Peake, Naomi Hammond, Kelly Thompson, Zoe McQuilten, Kimberley Haines, Edward Litton, Kiran Shekar, Daryl Jones, Adam Deane, Craig French, Jeremy Cohen, David Pilcher, Jamie Cooper, Alexis Paul Poole, Steven Webb, Manoj Saxena, Carol Hodgson, Glenn Eastwood, Simon Finfer
article en

Abstract

Background Data on long-term survival after intensive care unit (ICU) admission for sepsis and septic shock are limited. This study aimed to evaluate survival over five years among critically ill sepsis or septic shock patients discharged alive from hospital. Methods This retrospective cohort study of adults who survived to hospital discharge after non-elective ICU admission (2018–2024) used Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Adult Patient Database. Sepsis, septic shock, or non-sepsis patients were classified using diagnostic codes and physiological/laboratory criteria during first 24-h of ICU admission. Mixed-effects Cox models with time-varying covariate effects were used, adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, frailty, illness severity, and ICU interventions. Findings Of 557,538 hospital survivors, 7.3% had sepsis without shock, 11.5% septic shock, and 81.2% non-sepsis conditions. At five-years, unadjusted survival was lowest for septic shock (68.0%, 95% confidence interval/CI = 67.6–68.4%), sepsis without shock (74.2%, 73.7–74.6%), and non-sepsis (78.2%, 78.1–78.3%). After adjustment, hazards ratio/HR for sepsis without shock remained at or below the null relative to non-sepsis; 0–1 year: HR=0.95, 0.92–0.98; 1–3 years: 0.96, 0.93–1.00; 3–5 years: 1.03, 0.97–1.08, while septic shock showed persistent independent excess mortality; 0–1 year: HR=1.05,1.03–1.08; 1–3 years: 1.03, 1.00–1.06; and 3–5 years:1.09,1.05–1.14. Major predictors of mortality included age, frailty, comorbidities, and organ support. Interpretation Septic shock was associated with persistent independent excess mortality over five years after hospital discharge, whereas in sepsis without shock, this was largely explained by pre-existing comorbidity and frailty. Funding Medical Research Future Fund.

The Lancet Regional Health - Western PacificVol. 72
The Royal Melbourne Hospital (AU), The University of Queensland (AU), Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital (AU), Fiona Stanley Hospital (AU), Wellington Hospital (NZ), UNSW Sydney (AU), Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society (AU), Wakefield Hospital (NZ), Queen Elizabeth Hospital (AU), The George Institute for Global Health (AU), Western Health (AU), Monash Health (AU), Prince Charles Hospital (AU), Medical Research Institute of New Zealand (NZ), Royal Darwin Hospital (AU), George Institute for Global Health (CN), Melbourne Health (AU), Monash University (AU), The University of Adelaide (AU), Monash Institute of Medical Research (AU)
Australian Government
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.