Microbiology Section DOI : 10.7860/JCDR/2020/43262.13507
Year : 2020 | Month : Feb | Volume : 14 | Issue : 02 Page : DC05 - DC09

Bacterial Aetiology of Community Acquired Pneumonia in a Tertiary Care Hospital of Southern India

Chaithra Kanishan1, Veena A Shetty2, S Hampana3, Raghav R Sharma4, Avinash K Shetty5

1 PhD Scholar, Department of Microbiology, Nitte (Deemed to be University), Mangalore, Karnataka, India.
2 Additional Professor, Department of Microbiology, Nitte (Deemed to be University), Mangalore, Karnataka, India.
3 Research Scholar, Department of Microbiology, Nitte (Deemed to be University), Mangalore, Karnataka, India.
4 Professor and Head, Department of Medicine, Nitte (Deemed to be University), Mangalore, Karnataka, India.
5 Professor, Department of Paediatrics, Wakeforest School of Medicine, Winston-salem, North Carolina, USA.


NAME, ADDRESS, E-MAIL ID OF THE CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Dr. Veena A Shetty, Additional Professor, Department of Microbiology, K.S. Hegde Medical Academy, Nitte (Deemed to be University), Deralakatte, Mangaluru-575018, Karnataka, India.
E-mail: vndshetty@yahoo.co.in
Abstract

Introduction

Community Acquired Pneumonia (CAP) is associated with high morbidity and mortality worldwide. Knowledge of common microbial patterns in CAP is crucial for making initial therapeutic decisions for empiric antimicrobial treatment.

Aim

To determine the bacterial aetiology of CAP among hospitalised patients in a tertiary care hospital of Southern India.

Materials and Methods

A descriptive study was carried out among 220 adult subjects, enrolled from a period of August 2012 to August 2014, admitted to a tertiary care hospital of Southern India, with a provisional diagnosis of CAP. Subjects were recruited based on chest radiography and clinical criteria. Blood, sputum, pleural fluid, Bronchoalveolar Lavage (BAL) and tracheal aspirates were obtained for microbiological investigations. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was carried out on Streptococcus pneumoniae and Staphylococcus aureus isolates. The clinical specimens were further subjected to Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) to confirm the bacterial aetiology of S.pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae. Study data were summarised by frequency and percentage using SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) version 16.0.

Results

A total of 220 subjects who were diagnosed for CAP of which 154 (70%) were culture negative and 66 (30%) were culture positive cases of CAP. The most commonly isolated pathogens were 29 (44%) of S.pneumoniae followed by 21 (32%) of S.aureus, 10 (15%) of H.influenzae and 6 (9%) of Klebsiella pneumoniae. Resistance to penicillin occurred in 24 (82.75%) of S.pneumoniae isolates. Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was demonstrated among 10 (48%) of the 21 total S.aureus CAP cases.

Conclusion

Culture-based aetiologic diagnosis of CAP was made in only one-third of the cases. Ongoing antimicrobial resistance surveillance to S.pneumoniae and S. aureus is recommended. Determining the resistance profile of Klebsiella pneumoniae and H.influenzae is needed as pneumonia caused due to Gram negative aetiology is rising in the community setting. Rapid screening of bacterial CAP pathogens from clinical samples using PCR may be beneficial for clinicians to make a prudent antibiotic choice for CAP.

Introduction

The CAP is associated with high morbidity and mortality worldwide [1]. CAP occurs more commonly among young and elderly patients with higher mortality rates [2]. Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) defines “CAP an acute pulmonary parenchymal infection with the presence of an acute infiltrate on the chest X-ray or auscultatory findings such as altered breath sounds or localised rales consistent with pneumonia among patients who have not been previously hospitalised for ≥14 days before the onset of symptoms” [3]. Commonly reported bacterial pathogens causing CAP, include typical agents such as Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae and atypical agents such as Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Chlamydophila pneumoniae and Legionella pneumophila [2,4,5]. Viral pathogens such as Rhino virus, Influenza virus A and B, Parainfluenza virus, Corona virus, Respiratory syncytial virus were detected in 15% to 32% of adult patients with CAP [2,6].

In areas with high disease burden, the data on aetiology of pneumonia remains sparse [7]. The identification of the definite aetiology of CAP in blood or sputum samples is challenging despite the progress in diagnostic techniques and sophisticated molecular methods. The expanding rate of emergence of new and multi-drug resistant pathogens globally is a major concern for antibiotic management for CAP [8]. Although the incidence of CAP in India is reported to be 4 million cases annually with mortality rates up to 25% in patients admitted to the intensive care unit, there are very few reports describing the microbial aetiology of CAP [5,9-11]. There is also considerable variation in the microbial patterns, depending on the geographic location, and the use of different types of microbiologic investigations [5,8,11,12].

Knowledge of common microbial patterns in CAP is crucial for making initial therapeutic decisions for empiric antimicrobial treatment. This study was aimed at determining the bacterial aetiology of CAP in patients admitted to a tertiary care hospital in the rural area of Mangalore as many other previous studies have focused on determining the bacterial aetiology of CAP in the urban areas.

Materials and Methods

This was a descriptive study carried out among adult patients, 18 years of age or older, admitted to 1200-bedded tertiary care teaching hospital in the rural area of Mangalore, Karnataka, India with a working diagnosis of CAP. This study was conducted from a period of August 2012 to August 2014 and a total of 220 subjects were enrolled. Subjects with a diagnosis of CAP based on lung consolidation, pleural effusion and infiltrates on chest radiography at the time of admission and ≥2 additional symptoms (temperature >38.3°C, a new cough, chest pain, or new onset of dyspnea) were included in the study [13-15]. Subjects who have been hospitalised within the last 30 days, immunocompromised patients (e.g., HIV/AIDS, organ transplants, cancer patients or recipients of corticosteroids, anti-neoplastic therapy, or other immunosuppressive agents) and subjects with radiographic evidence of pulmonary tuberculosis were excluded [13,15]. All the participants gave written informed consent to participate, and the study protocol was approved by the Central Ethical Committee of the Institution (NU/CEC/Ph.D-46/2012).

Demographic data were collected from patient records which included age, sex, education, occupation, and income. Chest X-ray showing features of pneumonia (lung consolidation, pleural effusion, infiltrates) were noted. Specimens for microbiologic diagnosis included blood and sputum cultures in all enrolled patients. The samples were obtained in a sterile container, and the microscopic evaluation was done by Gram staining. Sputum validity was assessed using the Geckler criteria and samples containing over 10 Squamous Epithelial Cells (SEC) per Low Power Microscope Field (LPMF) were rejected [16]. Tracheal aspirate, pleural fluid, and BAL specimens were collected from the subjects who underwent mechanical ventilation. Samples accepted after microscopic evaluation were inoculated directly onto Sheep blood agar, MacConkey agar and Chocolate agar plates within 30 minutes of sample collection [Table/Fig-1,2] [16]. Culture positive isolates from the samples were initially identified by Gram stain from the colony, colony morphology, and oxidase reaction. They were further subjected to biochemical identification [17].

Streptococcus pneumoniae cultured on chocolate agar plate.

Staphylococcus aureus cultured on sheep blood agar plate.

Antibiotic susceptibility testing was done for S.pneumoniae and S.aureus using disk diffusion as described by the Kirby-Bauer method. A single colony from the culture positive isolates of S.pneumoniae and S.aureus were lawn cultured on Sheep blood agar and Mueller-Hinton agar (Himedia Laboratories, India) plates respectively [Table/Fig-3,4]. The plates were incubated at 37°C for 18-24 hours with 5% CO2 for S. pneumoniae. The zone of inhibition was measured, recorded and interpreted as sensitive and resistant according to the CLSI guidelines [18].

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Streptococcus pneumoniae by disk diffusion method on sheep blood agar plate.

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Staphylococcus aureus by disk diffusion method on Mueller-Hinton agar plate.

LytA (N-acetylmuramoyl-L-alanine-amidase) gene (229 bp), is the major autolytic enzyme of Streptococcus pneumoniae and is responsible for autolysis with great clinical importance. The 16s rRNA gene (538 bp) shows a high level of genetic diversity in H.influenzae. Both the genes were detected from the clinical samples by PCR for further confirmation. The bacterial DNA was extracted using the QIAamp DNA mini kit (QIAGEN-Sample and Assay Technologies). The primers used were as follows:

lytA: 5’-CGGACTACCGCCTTTATATCG-3’ and 5’-GTTTCAATCGTCAAGCCGTT-3’;

16s rRNA: 5’-TCCTAAGAAGAGCTCAGAGAT-3’ and 5’-TGATCCAACCGCAGGTTCC-3’ [19].

Statistical Analysis

Study data was summarised by frequency and percentage. The data were analysed using SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) version 16.0 software.

Results

Demographic Characteristics

A total of 220 subjects with CAP were enrolled in the study. Out of 220 subjects, bacterial aetiology was determined in 66 (30%) of the CAP cases. Among the 220 CAP cases, 122 (55.4%) were males, and 98 (44.5%) were females [Table/Fig-5]. It was observed that 130 (59%) of the subjects belonged to the age group 55 years and above [Table/Fig-5].

Distribution of the subjects (N=220) according to gender and age.

Distribution of the subjects according to gender (N=220)Distribution of the subjects according to age (N=220)
Male (%)Female (%)Age group (years)Culture positive CAP n=66 (%)Culture negative CAP n=154 (%)
122 (55.4%)98 (44.5%)18-255 (8)9 (6)
26-352 (3)5 (3)
36-456 (9)11 (7)
46-5517 (26)35 (23)
55 above36 (55)94 (61)

Bacterial Aetiology of CAP

The aetiology of culture positive CAP cases were isolated from various samples received which include: sputum (77%), pleural fluid (18%), tracheal aspirates (3%) and BAL (2%). Of the 66 culture positive cases of CAP, the most commonly isolated pathogens were S. pneumonia (44%) followed by Staphylococcus aureus (32%), H. influenzae (15%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (9%). The lytA gene (229 bp) of S. pneumoniae and the 16s rRNA (538 bp) of H. influenzae was detected by PCR technique. The lanes 3,4,10 and 11 were positive for lytA gene (229 bp) of S. pneumoniae, and the lanes 1,2,4 and 7 was positive for 16s rRNA (538 bp) of H. influenzae respectively [Table/Fig-6,7].

Gel-electrophoresis of PCR amplification of lytA gene: A 229bp fragment specific for lytA gene was amplified: Lane M: 100 bp DNA ladder; Lanes 3,4,10,11: Positive for lytA gene of S.pneumoniae.

Gel-electrophoresis of PCR amplification of 16s rRNA gene: A 538 bp fragment specific for 16SrRNA gene was amplified: Lane M: 100 bp DNA ladder; Lanes 1,2,4,7: Positive for 16s rRNA gene of H.influenze.

Antimicrobial Susceptibility

A 24 (82.75%) of the S. pneumoniae isolates were resistant to penicillin; 6 (21%), 11 (38%), 12 (41%) and 3 (10%) of the S. pneumoniae isolates showed resistance to erythromycin, amoxicillin-clavulanate, ciprofloxacin and cefotaxime respectively [Table/Fig-8].

Antibiotic susceptibility pattern of S.pneumoniae (n=29).

Name of the antibioticSusceptibleIntermediateResistant
Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid18011
Cefotaxime1883
Ciprofloxacin10712
Erythromycin2036
Penicillin5024

Out of 21, S.aureus isolates, 10 (48%) of them were found to be MRSA. Resistance to clindamycin, erythromycin, rifampicin, and gentamycin was seen among 4 (19%), 8 (38%), 1 (5%) and 8 (38%) of the S.aureus isolates respectively; all S.aureus isolates showed 100% susceptibility to vancomycin and teicoplanin [Table/Fig-9].

Antibiotic susceptibility pattern of S.aureus (n=21).

Name of the antibioticSusceptibleIntermediateResistant
Cefoxitin11010
Gentamycin1308
Vancomycin2100
Teicoplanin1920
Rifampicin1911
Erythromycin1308
Clindamycin1704

Discussion

This study reported the bacteriological profile of the isolates from adult patients with CAP admitted to a tertiary care hospital in Mangalore, Karnataka, India. A 59% of the subjects with CAP belonged to the age group 55 years and above suggesting that pneumonia is more common in aged individuals than in young adults in the present study setting. This finding is consistent with other studies of CAP in India which showed that the mean age of patients with CAP ranged from 54 to 58 years [9,12]. Studies conducted in high-income countries demonstrate a high incidence of CAP among older adults with substantial morbidity and mortality [20].

In a multicentric, well-conducted prospective study of adult CAP patients needing hospitalisation in the US, a pathogen was detected in only 38% of all patients with CAP [2]. The culture positivity rate of CAP cases in the present study population was only 30%. This may be due to prior antibiotic administration and other aetiological causes of CAP including atypical bacterial and viral pathogens. In contrast, a study conducted in Northern India using standard and molecular diagnostic techniques yielded a higher frequency (72%) of at least one pathogen [5]. In this study, 77% of the culture positive cases were from sputum samples. This result is consistent with a study performed in Ghana wherein 84.9% of the microbes causing CAP were isolated from sputum samples [21].

This study showed that S.pneumoniae was the most common aetiological agent of CAP. In another study from a tertiary care hospital in Mangalore region in Southern India, S.pneumoniae (31%) was reported to be the most predominant bacterial aetiology of CAP [10]. A similar study to assess the microbial aetiology in hospitalised North Indian adults with CAP showed S. pneumoniae (30.5%) as the most common pathogen isolated [5].

In India, there is limited data regarding antimicrobial susceptibility of S. pneumoniae isolated from sterile body fluids (blood, pleural fluid, etc.,) in patients with the invasive pneumococcal disease. A study done in Northern India has shown 50% of S.pneumoniae isolates were resistant to penicillin [22]. 52.6% of S.pneumoniae, resistance to penicillin was demonstrated in a collaborative study done in eight Asian countries including India [23]. A cross-sectional study from Southern India demonstrated emergence of multidrug-resistant strains of S. pneumoniae, isolated from respiratory specimens; in this study, 4% of S.pneumoniae isolated showed total resistance to penicillin and found to be multi-drug resistant strains, whereas, 10% showed intermediate resistance [24]. In the present study, penicillin resistance was demonstrated by 24 (82.75%) of the S. pneumoniae isolates, which is consistent with the findings reported by Chawla K et al., [24]. Another surveillance study evaluating invasive pneumococcal disease among children aged less than five years showed an overall low (8%) penicillin non-susceptibility compared to other studies; erythromycin resistance was 37%, Co-trimoxazole resistance occurred in 66% and 9% of S.pneumoniae isolates were multidrug resistant [25]. Thus, S.pneumoniae resistance profile varies significantly from region to region in India indicating a high level of genetic variation [26,27].

In the present study, MRSA was demonstrated among 10 (48%) of the total CAP cases. None of the isolates showed resistance to vancomycin. This finding is consistent with another report from India [5]. An observational cohort study was done by the Global Initiative for Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Pneumonia (GLIMP) group reported a lower point prevalence of MRSA pneumonia in India (1.4%) compared to the global incidence (3%) [28]. Studies in the US have reported an MRSA prevalence of 2.4% in CAP [29]. However, community acquired MRSA infections can manifest as severe necrotising pneumonia with high morbidity and mortality, especially following influenza infection [30,31]. In a study reported by Eshwara VK et al., bacteraemic pneumonia due to community acquired S.aureus infections were characterised by a severe disease with high case fatality rate, similar to other studies from high-income countries [32,33]. Similar to present study results, other reports from India have also shown increased rates of resistance of S. aureus isolates to ciprofloxacin and erythromycin. Therefore, the choice of empiric antibiotic therapy for suspected invasive S.aureus infections remains a major challenge in this study setting [33].

Molecular methods like PCR emphasises the effective identification of respiratory bacterial pathogens. Screening for the typical pathogens of CAP such as S.pneumoniae and H.influenzae were confirmed by PCR techniques in the present study. LytA (N-acetylmuramoyl-L-alanine-amidase), is the major autolytic enzyme of Pneumococcus being responsible for the deoxycholate and penicillin induced cell lysis in the stationary phase with great clinical importance [34]. The 16s rRNA gene diversity showed a higher level of diversity in H.influenzae ranging from 0.6% to 2.73% as reported by Sacchi CT et al., [35]. The detection of both lytA gene (229 bp) and the 16s rRNA (538 bp) of S.pneumoniae and H.influenzae respectively in this study showed that PCR is a highly sensitive and specific technique in identifying the bacterial aetiology of lower respiratory tract infections.

Future studies should evaluate the influence of age, co-morbidity, and disease severity on the microbial pattern of CAP. Due to the emergence of resistant S.pneumoniae and S.aureus- two key pathogens causing CAP, establishment of antimicrobial stewardship, infection control program and ongoing antimicrobial resistance surveillance is a key to guide clinicians and policy makers about optimal antibiotic management of CAP in the present study setting [36].

Limitation(s)

This study had several limitations. First, the occupation and income of the enrolled CAP subjects were not reported and also the impact of other factors such as co-morbidity, severity on the microbial patterns associated with CAP were not assessed due to unavailability of the complete clinical profile and demographic data among all patients. Second, even though a blood culture was obtained among all enrolled subjects, the blood culture results for all pathogens isolated were not mentioned due to a very low yield of bacterial CAP pathogens and higher frequency of possible contaminants (e.g., coagulase-negative Staphylococcus species). Third, diagnostic testing for atypical bacterial pathogens (e.g., Legionella and Mycoplasma) and viral pathogens were not carried out due to lack of funding. Fourth, the antimicrobial susceptibility testing was done only for S.pneumoniae and S.aureus isolates with a limited number of antibiotics and the antibiotic susceptibility testing was not carried out for the Gram negative isolates as the study focused on the resistance profile of Gram positive isolates. Finally, this study was performed in the in-patient setting at a single, tertiary care hospital in the rural area of Mangalore and results may not be generalised to other regions in India.

Conclusion(s)

CAP commonly affects the aged population than in young adults. Culture techniques help in identifying 1/3rd of the aetiology of CAP. PCR may prove to be a rapid and sensitive technique in the detection of CAP pathogens directly from the clinical samples. The prevalence of S.pneumoniae and S.aureus was higher compared to Gram negative bacterial aetiology among CAP patients in the rural area of coastal city in Southern India.

References

[1]Prina E, Ranzani OT, Torres A, Community-acquired pneumonia The Lancet 2015 386:1097-108.10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60733-4  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]

[2]Jain S, Self WH, Wunderink RG, Community-acquired pneumonia requiring hospitalisation among US adults N Engl J Med 2015 373:415-27.  [Google Scholar]

[3]Mandell LA, Wunderink RG, Anzueto A, Bartlett JG, Campbell GD, Dean NC, Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Thoracic Society consensus guidelines on the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults Clin Infect Dis 2007 44:S27-72.10.1086/51115917278083  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[4]Peto L, Nadjm B, Horby P, Ngan TT, van Doorn R, Kinh NV, The bacterial aetiology of adult community-acquired pneumonia in Asia: A systematic review Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 2014 108:326-37.10.1093/trstmh/tru05824781376  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[5]Para RA, Fomda BA, Jan RA, Shah S, Koul PA, Microbial etiology in hospitalised North Indian adults with community-acquired pneumonia Lung India 2018 35:108-15.  [Google Scholar]

[6]Gadsby NJ, Russell CD, McHugh MP, Mark H, Conway Morris A, Laurenson IF, Comprehensive molecular testing for respiratory pathogens in community-acquired pneumonia Clin Infect Dis 2016 62:817-23.10.1093/cid/civ121426747825  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[7]Troeger C, Forouzanfar M, Rao PC, Khalil I, Brown A, Swartz S, Estimates of the global, regional, and national morbidity, mortality, and aetiologies of lower respiratory tract infections in 195 countries: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015 Lancet Infect Dis 2017 17:1133-61.10.1016/S1473-3099(17)30396-1  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]

[8]Wunderink RG, Waterer G, Advances in the causes and management of community acquired pneumonia in adults BMJ 2017 358:247110.1136/bmj.j247128694251  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[9]Prasad P, Bhat S, Clinicomicrobiological study of community-acquired pneumonia Lung India 2017 34:491-92.  [Google Scholar]

[10]Acharya VK, Padyana M, Unnikrishnan B, Anand R, Acharya PR, Juneja DJ, Microbiological profile and drug sensitivity pattern among community acquired pneumonia patients in tertiary care center in Mangalore, Coastal Karnataka, India J Clin Diagn Res 2014 8:MC04-06.10.7860/JCDR/2014/7426.444625121014  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[11]Shah BA, Singh G, Naik MA, Dhobi GN, Bacteriological and clinical profile of community acquired pneumonia in hospitalised patients Lung India 2010 27:54-57.10.4103/0970-2113.6360620616935  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[12]Mahendra M, Jayaraj BS, Limaye S, Acharya SK, Dhar D, Mahesh PA, Factors influencing the severity of community-acquired pneumonia Lung India 2018 35:284-89.10.4103/lungindia.lungindia_334_1729970765  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[13]Diercks DB, Diner BM, Edlow JA, Fesmire FM, Godwin SA, Hahn SA, Clinical policy: Critical issues in the management of adult patients presenting to the emergency department with community-acquired pneumonia Ann Emerg Med 2009 54:704-31.10.1016/j.annemergmed.2009.07.00219853781  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[14]Charles PG, Whitby M, Fuller AJ, Stirling R, Wright AA, Korman TM, The etiology of community-acquired pneumonia in Australia: Why penicillin plus doxycycline or a macrolide is the most appropriate therapy Clin Infect Dis 2008 46:1513-21.10.1086/58674918419484  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[15]Bjarnason A, Asgeirsson H, Baldursson O, Kristinsson KG, Gottfredsson M, Mortality in healthcare-associated pneumonia in a low resistance setting: A prospective observational study Infect Dis (Lond) 2015 47:130-36.10.3109/00365548.2014.98084225664503  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[16]Geckler RW, Gremillion DH, MacAllister CK, Ellenbogen C, Microscopic and bacterial comparison of paired sputa and transtracheal aspirates J Clin Microbiol 1977 6:366-69.  [Google Scholar]

[17]Washington CW, Stephen A, Janda W, Koneman’s color atlas and textbook of diagnostic microbiology 2006 6th edEnglandLipincott Williams & Wilkins Ltd:40-42.  [Google Scholar]

[18]Clinical and laboratory standards institutePerformance Standards for Antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Seventeenth informational supplement Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute 2007 M100-S17(27):53  [Google Scholar]

[19]Strålin K, Korsgaard J, Olcén P, Evaluation of a multiplex PCR for bacterial pathogens applied to bronchoalveolar lavage Eur Resp 2006 28:568-75.10.1183/09031936.06.0000610616737990  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[20]Ramirez JA, Wiemken TL, Peyrani P, Arnold FW, Kelley R, Mattingly WA, Adults hospitalised with pneumonia in the United States: Incidence, epidemiology, and mortality Clin Infect Dis 2017 65:1806-12.10.1093/cid/cix64729020164  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[21]Amissah I, Pappoe F, Prevalence of bacterial pathogens isolated from sputum cultures of hospitalised adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia at the Cape coast teaching hospital Ghana J Med Res 2014 3:58-61.  [Google Scholar]

[22]Goyal R, Singh NP, Kaur M, Talwar V, Antimicrobial resistance in invasive and colonizing Streptococcus pneumoniae in North India Indian J Med Microbiol 2007 25:256-59.10.4103/0255-0857.3477017901646  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[23]Song JH, Oh WS, Kang CI, Chung DR, Peck KR, Ko KS, Epidemiology and clinical outcomes of community-acquired pneumonia in adult patients in Asian countries: A prospective study by the Asian network for surveillance of resistant pathogens Int J Antimicrob Agents 2008 31:107-14.10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2007.09.01418162378  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[24]Chawla K, Gurung B, Mukhopadhyay C, Bairy I, Reporting emerging resistance of Streptococcus pneumoniae from India J Glob Infect Dis 2010 2:10-14.10.4103/0974-777X.5924520300412  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[25]Manoharan A, Manchanda V, Balasubramanian S, Lalwani S, Modak M, Bai S, Invasive pneumococcal disease in children aged younger than 5 years in India: A surveillance study Lancet Infect Dis 2017 17:305-12.10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30466-2  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]

[26]Lalitha MK, Shomita M, Pai R, Thomas K, Epidemiological typing of Streptococcus pneumoniae from various is in India & Korea using Box A PCR fingerprinting Indian J Med Res 2002 116:177-85.  [Google Scholar]

[27]Kim SH, Song JH, Chung DR, Thamlikitkul V, Yang Y, Wang H, Changing trends in antimicrobial resistance and serotypes of Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates in Asian countries: An Asian Network of Surveillance of Resistant Pathogens (ANSORP) study Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2012 56:1418-26.10.1128/AAC.05658-1122232285  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[28]Aliberti S, Reyes LF, Faverio P, Sotgiu G, Dore S, Rodriguez AH, Global initiative for Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia (GLIMP): An international, observational cohort study Lancet Infect Dis 2016 16:1364-76.10.1016/S1473-3099(16)30267-5  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]

[29]Moran GJ, Krishnadasan A, Gorwitz RJ, Fosheim GE, Albrecht V, Limbago B, Prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus as an etiology of community-acquired pneumonia Clin Infect Dis 2012 54:1126-33.10.1093/cid/cis02222438343  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[30]Francis JS, Doherty MC, Lopatin U, Johnston CP, Sinha G, Ross T, Severe community-onset pneumonia in healthy adults caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus carrying the Panton-Valentine leukocidin genes Clin Infect Dis 2005 40:100-07.10.1086/42714815614698  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[31]Barrett NA, Armstrong-James D, Edgeworth J, Wyncoll D, Novel H1N1 influenza and Panton-Valentine leukocidin Staphylococcus aureus necrotizing pneumonia Br J Hosp Med (Lond) 2010 71:350-51.10.12968/hmed.2010.71.6.4845620551877  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[32]Self WH, Wunderink RG, Williams DJ, Zhu Y, Anderson EJ, Balk RA, Staphylococcus aureus community-acquired pneumonia: Prevalence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes Clin Infect Dis 2016 63:300-09.10.1093/cid/ciw30027161775  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[33]Eshwara VK, Munim F, Tellapragada C, Kamath A, Varma M, Lewis LE, Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia in an Indian tertiary care hospital: Observational study on clinical epidemiology, resistance characteristics, and carriage of the Panton-Valentine leukocidin gene International Journal of Infectious Diseases 2013 17:1051-55.10.1016/j.ijid.2013.06.00223891294  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[34]Dobay O, Epidemiology of Streptococcus pneumoniae: Molecular characterisation, antibiotic sensitivity and serotyping of hungarian isolates Acta Microbiol Immunol Hung 2008 55(4):395-407.10.1556/AMicr.55.2008.4.419130747  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[35]Sacchi CT, Alber D, Dull P, Mothershed EA, Whitney AM, Barnett GA, High level of sequence diversity in the 16S rRNA genes of Haemophilus influenzae isolates is useful for molecular subtyping J Clin Microbiol 2005 43:3734-42.10.1128/JCM.43.8.3734-3742.200516081903  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]

[36]Kotwani A, Kumar S, Swain PK, Suri JC, Gaur SN, Antimicrobial drug prescribing patterns for community-acquired pneumonia in hospitalised patients: A retrospective pilot study from New Delhi, India Indian J Pharmacol 2015 47:375-82.10.4103/0253-7613.16125826288468  [Google Scholar]  [CrossRef]  [PubMed]