Purpose of Review <p>: To explore the definitions of sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy and how that impacts interpretation of the available data and considerations of long-term prognosis and management.</p> Recent Findings <p>: The field of sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy has been hampered by lack of consensus about its proper definition, with a great deal of heterogeneity in clinical trial data in both individual studies and meta-analyses and consequent disparity of estimates of incidence, prognosis, and clinical significance. New diagnostic techniques, while potentially shedding light on pathophysiology, have only exacerbated these challenges.</p> Summary <p>There are few persuasive data to suggest that decreased ejection fraction consequent to sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy merits a treatment strategy different from other causes, except that improvement may be more likely inasmuch as the classic description includes reversibility over 7 to 10 days. For persistent cardiac dysfunction after sepsis, whether pre-existing or newly diagnosed, institution and titration of guideline-directed medical therapy for HFrEF seems to be the most logical strategy. Armed with a clear understanding of what parameters of cardiac function are most important, clinicians can develop therapeutic strategies that make sense and calibrate them according to the clinical response.</p>