Pediatric Pulmonology Unit, Advanced Pediatrics Centre, PGIMER, Chandigarh, 160012, India.
Indian J Pediatr. 2018 Jan;85(1):25-34. doi: 10.1007/s12098-017-2486-y. Epub 2017 Sep 25.
Childhood community acquired pneumonia continues to be an important clinical problem at the individual, institutional and community levels. Determination of microbial etiology is critical to develop evidence-based management (therapeutic and prophylactic) decisions. For decades, the approach to this relied on culture of lung aspirate specimens obtained from children with radiographically confirmed pneumonia, before administering antibiotics. Such studies revealed the major bacteria associated with pneumonia, prompting the World Health Organization to develop a highly sensitive clinical definition of pneumonia and advocate empiric antibiotic therapy; in order to save lives (focusing on community settings lacking resources for diagnostic tests). However, it spawned research studies conducted in/from/by institutions enrolling children with the relatively non-specific WHO definition of pneumonia. Specificity got further compromised by abandoning lung aspiration and using naso/oro pharyngeal specimens; even in children who had received antibiotics. This led to the recovery of viruses more often than bacteria. The use of highly sensitive molecular based diagnostics (especially PCR) facilitated the detection of multiple organisms (bacteria, viruses, atypical organisms and even fungal species); making it difficult to attribute etiology in individual cases. This challenge was sought to be addressed through the multi-site PERCH Study (Pneumonia Etiology Research for Child Health), designed as a case-control study to conclusively determine the etiology of pneumonia. However, despite a slew of publications, the answer to the central question of etiology has not emerged so far. Since none of the PERCH Study sites was located in India, the Community Acquired Pneumonia Etiology Study (CAPES) was conducted at Chandigarh. This turned out to be the largest single-centre pneumonia etiology study, and generated a wealth of data. This article summarizes the current challenges in pneumonia etiology research; outlines the key observations from the PERCH and CAPES projects, as well as other important studies; and suggests a way forward for pneumonia etiology research in the current era.
儿童社区获得性肺炎仍然是个体、机构和社区层面的重要临床问题。确定微生物病因对于制定基于证据的管理(治疗和预防)决策至关重要。几十年来,这种方法依赖于对经影像学证实患有肺炎的儿童的肺抽吸标本进行培养,然后再给予抗生素。这些研究揭示了与肺炎相关的主要细菌,促使世界卫生组织制定了高度敏感的肺炎临床定义,并提倡经验性抗生素治疗;为了拯救生命(关注缺乏诊断测试资源的社区环境)。然而,这催生了在/来自/由招收具有相对非特异性世卫组织肺炎定义的儿童的机构进行的研究。通过放弃肺抽吸并使用鼻咽或口咽标本,特异性进一步受到损害;即使在已接受抗生素治疗的儿童中也是如此。这导致病毒的回收率高于细菌。使用高度敏感的基于分子的诊断方法(特别是 PCR)有助于检测多种病原体(细菌、病毒、非典型病原体甚至真菌种类);使得难以在个别病例中确定病因。通过多地点 PERCH 研究(儿童健康肺炎病因研究)来解决这一挑战,该研究设计为病例对照研究,以确定肺炎的病因。然而,尽管发表了大量出版物,但迄今为止,病因的核心问题的答案尚未出现。由于 PERCH 研究的所有地点都不在印度,因此在昌迪加尔进行了社区获得性肺炎病因研究(CAPES)。这是最大的单一中心肺炎病因研究,产生了大量数据。本文总结了肺炎病因研究中的当前挑战;概述了 PERCH 和 CAPES 项目以及其他重要研究的关键观察结果;并为当前时代的肺炎病因研究提出了前进的方向。