NAC pediátrica: recomendaciones y certeza
20 preguntas clínicas para aprender a leer una guía y la evidencia que sostiene cada decisión.
Bradley JS, Byington CL, Shah SS, et al. The Management of Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Infants and Children Older Than 3 Months of Age: Clinical Practice Guidelines by PIDS and IDSA. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;53(7):e25–e76. DOI:10.1093/cid/cir531.
Artículo original · Volver al índice
Executive Summary · resumen ejecutivo
Diseño
Guía PIDS/IDSA con revisión de literatura y consenso experto. No es un ensayo propio ni un metaanálisis con una única estimación combinada.
Población
Niños previamente sanos >3 meses, con NAC ambulatoria u hospitalaria en Estados Unidos. Excluye neonatos, inmunocomprometidos, ventilación domiciliaria y ciertas enfermedades crónicas.
Estructura
20 preguntas clínicas, 92 recomendaciones numeradas, diez tablas y una figura. Cada recomendación se acompaña de fuerza y calidad de evidencia.
Objetivo: disminuir morbilidad y mortalidad mediante recomendaciones que el clínico aplica según las circunstancias individuales.
Introduction
Burden of Disease
Describe carga mundial y datos estadounidenses anteriores a 2011. Hospitalizaciones en 2006: 201,1 por 100.000 hasta 18 años; en menores de un año, 912,9; entre 13–18 años, 62,8. Son tasas de hospitalización por códigos diagnósticos, no de toda NAC ni probabilidades diagnósticas.
Etiology
Virus y bacterias; detección de varios agentes puede reflejar coinfección o colonización. La técnica de detección y selección de pacientes modifican las proporciones. No se deben promediar como si los estudios fueran intercambiables.
Clinical Questions Addressed by the Expert Panel
Las preguntas I–XX del recorrido siguiente cubren lugar de atención, pruebas, tratamiento, complicaciones, falta de respuesta, alta y prevención. El documento no aborda todos los cuidados cotidianos del niño internado ni todas las situaciones especiales.
Methodology
Practice Guidelines
Recomendaciones desarrolladas para apoyar decisiones; deben ser válidas, reproducibles, claras, aplicables y flexibles.
Panel Composition
Panel multidisciplinario de pediatría comunitaria, salud pública, cuidados intensivos, urgencias, hospitalismo, infectología, neumología y cirugía, con revisores de microbiología y radiología intervencionista.
Process Overview
Búsquedas en PubMed hasta mayo de 2010, incorporando artículos posteriores especialmente relevantes, resúmenes de reuniones y guías existentes. GRADE para fuerza y calidad.
Consensus Development Based on Evidence
Subgrupos por pregunta, reuniones, revisión interna y externa, y aprobación de organizaciones participantes. La falta de evidencia de alta calidad en varias áreas obliga a usar juicio clínico.
Guidelines and Conflict of Interest
Declaración de intereses financieros y otros vínculos; evaluación caso por caso para limitar roles cuando correspondiera. La declaración no demuestra ausencia ni presencia de sesgo por sí sola.
Table 1 · Strength of Recommendations and Quality of Evidence
¿Cuánta confianza merece el efecto estimado?
Beneficios, daños, cargas y valores.
¿Con qué firmeza orientar la acción?
| Calidad | Lectura de la tabla de 2011 |
|---|---|
| Alta | Investigación adicional poco probable que cambie la confianza en el efecto. |
| Moderada | Puede cambiar la confianza y la estimación. |
| Baja | Probable impacto importante de investigación adicional. |
| Muy baja | Estimación del efecto muy incierta. |
Fuerte no significa efecto grande ni evidencia alta. Una acción puede tener un balance favorable aun con pocos datos. Débil no significa inútil: puede haber alternativas razonables por contexto y preferencias.
Los niveles describen confianza, no porcentajes de certeza. No se codifican alta=100%, baja=25%.
Recorrido por las 20 preguntas clínicas
Guideline Recommendations for Management of CAP in Infants and Children. Se conserva el orden I–XX. Los apartados “Recommendations” y “Evidence Summary” se muestran como recomendación resumida y lectura de su sustento; el resumen ejecutivo y el cuerpo repiten estas preguntas.
Site-of-Care Management Decisions
I. When Does a Child or Infant With CAP Require Hospitalization?
Recomendaciones 1–4 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
NAC moderada/grave, hipoxemia sostenida <90% a nivel del mar o distrés; considerar lactantes de 3–6 meses con sospecha bacteriana, patógenos virulentos y barreras de observación/seguimiento.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
La valoración integra fisiología y condiciones de cuidado; un corte no reemplaza el examen.
II. When Should a Child With CAP Be Admitted to an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) or a Unit With Continuous Cardiorespiratory Monitoring?
Recomendaciones 5–11 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Ventilación invasiva, soporte no invasivo agudo, insuficiencia respiratoria inminente, compromiso hemodinámico, SpO₂ <92% pese a FiO₂≥0,50 o alteración mental.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
Los puntajes no son criterio exclusivo de UCI. La tabla 4 se adapta de criterios adultos y requiere contexto pediátrico.
Diagnostic Testing for Pediatric CAP
III. What Diagnostic Laboratory and Imaging Tests Should Be Used in a Child With Suspected CAP in an Outpatient or Inpatient Setting?
Recomendaciones 12–38 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Seleccionar pruebas según gravedad, ámbito y capacidad de modificar decisiones. Evitar hemocultivos y Rx rutinarios en niños ambulatorios estables.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
Se desarrolla cada subtítulo diagnóstico debajo: rendimiento, referencia imperfecta y utilidad clínica son distintos.
IV. What Additional Diagnostic Tests Should Be Used in a Child With Severe or Life-Threatening CAP?
Recomendaciones 39–40 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Aspirado traqueal al intubar y estudios virales dirigidos; técnicas invasivas reservadas a enfermedad grave sin diagnóstico inicial.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
Colonización de tráquea puede producir cultivos que no representan el agente pulmonar. Más detección no implica mejor exactitud.
Anti-Infective Treatment
V. Which Anti-Infective Therapy Should Be Provided to a Child With Suspected CAP in Both Outpatient and Inpatient Settings?
Recomendaciones 41–49 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Outpatients: muchos preescolares con cuadro viral no requieren antibiótico; amoxicilina para sospecha bacteriana, macrólido ante atípicos e influenza antiviral según contexto. Inpatients: ampicilina/penicilina si vacunado y resistencia local apropiada; cefalosporina en situaciones indicadas; añadir cobertura de atípicos o S. aureus cuando se sospechen.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
La selección se basa en edad, vacunación, epidemiología y gravedad; no en la opacidad aislada.
VI. How Can Resistance to Antimicrobials Be Minimized?
Recomendaciones 50–53 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Limitar exposición, espectro, dosis insuficientes y duración; usar el curso eficaz más corto.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
La guía señala que reducir consumo no demuestra automáticamente menos infecciones por organismos resistentes: son desenlaces diferentes.
VII. What Is the Appropriate Duration of Antimicrobial Therapy for CAP?
Recomendaciones 54–55 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Diez días eran los cursos mejor estudiados en 2011; admite que cursos menores podrían servir en enfermedad leve. SAMR puede requerir más tiempo.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
“Mejor estudiado” no significa “única duración eficaz”. No se presenta como pauta actual.
VIII. How Should the Clinician Follow the Child With CAP for the Expected Response to Therapy?
Recomendaciones 56 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Esperar mejoría clínica y de laboratorio en 48–72 h; investigar falta de mejoría o deterioro.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
El curso radiográfico puede rezagarse respecto del clínico; una imagen residual no prueba fracaso.
Adjunctive Surgical and Non–Anti-Infective Therapy for Pediatric CAP
IX. How Should a Parapneumonic Effusion Be Identified?
Recomendaciones 57 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Confirmar líquido pleural con Rx; ecografía o TC si no es concluyente.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
La ecografía también define tamaño y loculaciones; diagnóstico y planificación de drenaje cumplen funciones distintas.
X. What Factors Are Important in Determining Whether Drainage of the Parapneumonic Effusion Is Required?
Recomendaciones 58–59 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Tamaño y compromiso respiratorio; tabla 8 y figura 1 organizan la decisión.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
Las categorías de riesgo no son porcentajes calibrados de mal resultado.
XI. What Laboratory Testing Should Be Performed on Pleural Fluid?
Recomendaciones 60–63 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Gram y cultivo; PCR puede aumentar detección. pH, glucosa, proteínas y LDH no se recomiendan rutinariamente por escaso cambio de conducta; celularidad ayuda a diferenciar otras etiologías.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
Cultivo negativo no excluye infección, especialmente con antibióticos previos.
XII. What Are the Drainage Options for Parapneumonic Effusions?
Recomendaciones 64–66 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Pequeños no complicados: antibiótico sin drenaje habitual. Moderados con distrés, grandes o purulentos: drenaje. Tubo con fibrinólisis o VATS según experiencia; libre flujo puede permitir tubo solo.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
Los ensayos pequeños no establecen superioridad universal de una técnica; similitud observada no demuestra equivalencia formal.
XIII. When Should VATS or Open Decortication Be Considered in Patients Who Have Had Chest Tube Drainage, With or Without Fibrinolytic Therapy?
Recomendaciones 67 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
VATS ante derrame moderado/grande y compromiso persistente tras unos 2–3 días de tubo y fibrinólisis completada; decorticación abierta como alternativa de mayor morbilidad.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
Fiebre persistente aislada no define fracaso del drenaje.
XIV. When Should a Chest Tube Be Removed Either After Primary Drainage or VATS?
Recomendaciones 68 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Sin fuga aérea y drenaje <1 mL/kg/24 h, habitualmente estimado desde las últimas 12 h.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
Recomendación fuerte con evidencia muy baja: útil para distinguir fuerza de certeza. No es una calculadora clínica validada.
XV. What Antibiotic Therapy and Duration Is Indicated for the Treatment of Parapneumonic Effusion/Empyema?
Recomendaciones 69–71 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Dirigir por cultivo y susceptibilidad; con cultivo negativo seguir esquema hospitalario. Duración según drenaje y respuesta, habitualmente 2–4 semanas en el texto.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
Rango de duración no es comparación aleatorizada de dos contra cuatro semanas.
Management of the Child Not Responding to Treatment
XVI. What Is the Appropriate Management of a Child Who Is Not Responding to Treatment for CAP?
Recomendaciones 72–75 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
A las 48–72 h reevaluar gravedad, imágenes y agentes persistentes/resistentes/nuevos; BAL en ventilados y otras muestras invasivas para situaciones graves sin diagnóstico.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
Falta de respuesta puede deberse al huésped, fármaco, complicación o diagnóstico alternativo; no sólo a resistencia.
XVII. How Should Nonresponders With Pulmonary Abscess or Necrotizing Pneumonia Be Managed?
Recomendaciones 76 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Antibióticos IV iniciales; abscesos periféricos definidos sin comunicación bronquial pueden drenarse por imagen. Muchos drenan por árbol bronquial.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
Recomendación débil y evidencia muy baja; las intervenciones se individualizan.
Discharge Criteria
XVIII. When Can a Hospitalized Child With CAP Be Safely Discharged?
Recomendaciones 77–84 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Mejoría global y fiebre disminuida 12–24 h; SpO₂>90% en aire 12–24 h; estado mental estable, sin trabajo respiratorio importante, tolerancia del tratamiento y cuidados/seguimiento asegurados.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
No todos los criterios tienen la misma calidad de evidencia; capacidad familiar y barreras importan tanto como parámetros clínicos.
XIX. When Is Parenteral Outpatient Therapy Indicated, In Contrast to Oral Step-Down Therapy?
Recomendaciones 85–87 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Si ya no requiere cuidados agudos pero sí vía parenteral, programa pediátrico adecuado; preferir transición oral cuando es posible.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
Evidencia para vías y programas es limitada; estancia y costos dependen del sistema.
Prevention
XX. Can Pediatric CAP Be Prevented?
Recomendaciones 88–92 del original.
Recommendations · síntesis
Vacunación contra neumococo, Hib, pertussis e influenza; proteger contactos de lactantes e inmunoprofilaxis VSR en alto riesgo según guías de su época.
Evidence Summary · cómo leer el sustento
Las vacunas, formulaciones y criterios son históricos. Un efecto relativo no indica beneficio absoluto sin riesgo basal.
Los subtítulos de diagnóstico · sección III
Microbiologic Testing
Blood Cultures: Outpatient
No rutinario en ambulatorios vacunados y no tóxicos; obtener en fracaso, progresión o deterioro. Positividad por patógenos <2% en estudios citados.
Blood Cultures: Inpatient
En NAC bacteriana moderada/grave y complicada. Positividad usual citada 1,4–3,4%; mayor en muestras seleccionadas. Seleccionar los más graves puede inflar rendimiento.
Follow-up Blood Cultures
No rutinarios en bacteriemia neumocócica con mejoría; sí documentar resolución de bacteriemia por S. aureus.
Sputum Gram Stain and Culture
En hospitalizados capaces de expectorar. Calidad de muestra y colonización condicionan interpretación.
Urinary Antigen Detection Tests
No recomendado para neumococo en niños: colonización puede generar positivos sin enfermedad invasiva. Rendimiento adulto no se transfiere automáticamente.
Testing For Viral Pathogens
Influenza y otros virus pueden orientar pruebas y tratamiento. Un positivo no elimina coinfección y un negativo no descarta virus con sensibilidad imperfecta.
Testing for Atypical Bacteria
Estudiar Mycoplasma ante sospecha; dificultades de disponibilidad y exactitud. El texto no recomienda prueba para C. pneumoniae por falta de test oportuno y fiable.
Ancillary Diagnostic Testing
Complete Blood Cell Count
No rutinario en toda NAC ambulatoria; contextualizar en cuadros graves. Leucocitosis por sí sola discrimina mal etiología.
Acute-Phase Reactants
PCR, VSG y PCT no separan virus/bacterias por sí solos. Pueden apoyar seguimiento de enfermedad grave.
Pulse Oximetry
Medir ante sospecha de hipoxemia; orienta nivel de cuidado y estudios.
Chest Radiography
| Subtítulo | Recomendación | Fuerza / evidencia |
|---|---|---|
| Initial Chest Radiographs: Outpatient | No Rx rutinaria si puede tratarse ambulatoriamente (31); sí ante hipoxemia/distrés/fracasos (32) | Fuerte/alta para 31; fuerte/moderada para 32 |
| Initial Chest Radiographs: Inpatient | Rx en hospitalizados (33) | Fuerte/moderada |
| Follow-up Chest Radiograph(s) | No control rutinario en buena recuperación (34); repetir por deterioro/falta de respuesta y situaciones específicas (35–38) | Moderada o baja, según recomendación |
La sección de evidencia “Initial Chest Radiographs” agrega el caso de fiebre prolongada y tos aun sin taquipnea/distrés. Para recurrente en mismo lóbulo o colapso con sospecha anatómica propone control a 4–6 semanas. No elimina el juicio clínico ni diagnostica bacterias por imagen.
Los subtítulos de tratamiento · sección V
Outpatients · Inpatients
La elección empírica se organiza por ámbito y luego por sospecha etiológica; no todos requieren antibacterianos.
Bacterial Pathogens in CAP
Streptococcus pneumoniae
Amoxicilina para NAC bacteriana leve/moderada ambulatoria; penicilina/ampicilina o alternativas según resistencia local, susceptibilidad y gravedad.
Haemophilus influenzae
Diferenciar producción de betalactamasa y estado vacunal; terapia dirigida según aislamiento.
Streptococcus pyogenes
Generalmente sensible a penicilina; en enfermedad invasiva se discuten decisiones adicionales según contexto.
Staphylococcus aureus
Distinguir MSSA y MRSA; cobertura según susceptibilidad, gravedad y características clínicas.
Atypical Pneumonia
Mycoplasma pneumoniae
Los autores remarcan falta de ensayos pediátricos adecuados que separen historia natural y efecto del antibiótico; no confundir detección con beneficio terapéutico demostrado en toda edad.
Chlamydia trachomatis · C. pneumoniae
Situaciones de edad y pruebas diferentes; la guía excluye del alcance a los lactantes menores de tres meses, aunque describe etiologías y datos que contextualizan.
Viral Pathogens in CAP
Influenza
Antiviral temprano y considerar coinfección en cuadros graves. Resultados negativos imperfectos no obligan a demorar tratamiento si la sospecha es fuerte.
Respiratory Syncytial Virus
Discute ribavirina y profilaxis con palivizumab de su época; no presenta esto como indicación actual.
Parainfluenza Virus, Adenovirus, Metapneumovirus, Rhinovirus, Coronavirus, and Bocavirus
En 2011 no había datos prospectivos controlados para antivirales de estas etiologías en NAC pediátrica.
Mapa de las diez tablas y la figura
| Título original | Para qué sirve y cómo leerlo |
|---|---|
| Table 1. Strength of Recommendations and Quality of Evidence | Dos dimensiones GRADE; desarrollada arriba. |
| Table 2. Complications Associated With Community-Acquired Pneumonia | Pulmonares: derrame/empiema, neumotórax, absceso, fístula, necrosis, insuficiencia respiratoria; metastásicas y sistémicas. Lista, no prevalencias. |
| Table 3. Criteria for Respiratory Distress in Children With Pneumonia | FR por edad, disnea, retracciones, quejido, aleteo, apnea, sensorio y SpO₂. Criterios clínicos, no probabilidades. |
| Table 4. Criteria for CAP Severity of Illness in Children with Community-Acquired Pneumonia | Mayores y menores; considerar monitoreo intensivo con ≥1 mayor o ≥2 menores. Adaptación de adultos; no usar como único criterio. |
| Table 5. Selection of Antimicrobial Therapy for Specific Pathogens | Opciones dirigidas IV y oral, susceptibilidad y dosis; consultar tabla original e31–e32 para instrucciones completas. |
| Table 6. Influenza Antiviral Therapy | Agentes, formulaciones y edades del documento histórico; no un ensayo comparativo. |
| Table 7. Empiric Therapy for Pediatric Community-Acquired Pneumonia (CAP) | Selección empírica por edad, vacunación, ámbito y etiología sospechada; revisar dosis máximas en original. |
| Table 8. Factors Associated with Outcomes and Indication for Drainage of Parapneumonic Effusions | Tamaño y compromiso respiratorio/purulencia orientan drenaje; bajo/moderado/alto no son riesgos cuantificados. |
| Table 9. Summary of Published Fibrinolysis Regimens | Protocolos de tPA/uroquinasa de estudios distintos. No comparar dosis sin tener en cuenta protocolo y población. |
| Table 10. Areas for Future Research in Pediatric Community-Acquired Pneumonia (CAP) | 19 áreas: epidemiología, gravedad, diagnóstico, Rx, resistencia, respuesta, terapia, costos, drenaje, duración, alta y barreras. |
Figure 1 · Management of pneumonia with parapneumonic effusion
Sin complicaciones: antibióticos, observación.
Distrés o pus orientan drenaje.
Drenaje en la mayoría; valorar evolución.
Esquema didáctico simplificado a partir de tabla 8/figura 1, no reproducción integral del algoritmo. Pequeño: <10 mm o <¼ hemitórax; moderado: >10 mm y <½; grande: >½. Los límites textuales no cubren cada caso frontera; requiere valoración clínica.
Estadística y matemática en evidencia real
1 · Cambiar el denominador cambia el mensaje
En un estudio citado, el hemocultivo modificó antibióticos en 5 de 6 niños con cultivo positivo, entre 291 estudiados (e46).
No se contradicen. El primer porcentaje describe impacto condicionado a ser positivo; el segundo, rendimiento global observado. Ninguno demuestra por sí mismo beneficio clínico ni costo-efectividad.
2 · Diferencia absoluta y relativa: prueba rápida de influenza
La guía cita un ensayo de 391 pacientes donde se aleatorizó informar o no al médico el resultado de influenza. Entre positivos: prescripción 7,3% con resultado conocido frente a 24,5% sin conocimiento (e46; referencia 106). No todos los 391 pertenecen a esos dos subgrupos.
RR = 7,3 / 24,5 ≈ 0,30
Reducción relativa ≈ 70,2%
OR = (0,073/0,927) / (0,245/0,755) ≈ 0,24
Son cálculos didácticos sobre porcentajes redondeados, no efectos nuevos ajustados ni estimaciones con IC. El evento es prescribir; no curación, mortalidad o adecuación. Invertir 0,172 da ≈5,8 como inverso de diferencia de prescripción, pero llamarlo NNT clínico sin matiz confundiría desenlaces.
3 · Odds ratio y regresión logística: qué hay realmente aquí
Bradley cita una cohorte retrospectiva de adultos: diagnóstico rápido de influenza asociado a odds seis veces mayores de suspender/no iniciar antibiótico que diagnóstico por PCR demorado (e47; ref. 112). No es un OR calculado por el panel ni un efecto causal demostrado por la guía.
Se mantiene OR=6 sólo para mostrar matemática. No predice a un niño ni representa el riesgo basal del estudio.
Una regresión logística podría modelar ese desenlace sí/no y ajustar covariables; los coeficientes exponenciados son OR. Esta guía no realiza una regresión logística propia ni proporciona aquí el modelo completo del estudio adulto: no se inventan covariables ni se da por comprobado un ajuste específico.
4 · Significativo ≠ suficiente para discriminar
Los reactantes pueden ser mayores en neumonía neumocócica y aun solaparse mucho. En un estudio citado, PCR>6 mg/dL tenía sensibilidad 26% y VPP43%; VSG>35 mm/h, sensibilidad25% y VPP38% (e49). Cada denominador es diferente: detectar sólo 26 de cada 100 casos no equivale a que 26 de cada 100 positivos sean enfermos.
5 · Concordancia no es exactitud
La guía cita κ>0,6 para 19 de 20 lectores al evaluar 92 Rx con definiciones y entrenamiento estandarizados (e50). κ corrige concordancia esperada por márgenes; no significa sensibilidad60% ni que 60% de las neumonías sean bacterianas. Dos lectores pueden coincidir y estar equivocados.
6 · Ensayos pequeños: no superioridad ≠ equivalencia
Fibrinólisis frente a VATS: ensayos de 30+30 y 18+18, con resultados similares y menor costo de fibrinólisis; otro de 10+8 usó fibrinólisis sólo como rescate y favoreció VATS en estancia (e60). Protocolos distintos y muestras pequeñas limitan la comparación. Equivalencia requiere margen predefinido y precisión suficiente; “no significativo” no basta.
7 · Un evento raro necesita muchos participantes
El documento cita 156 muertes entre 20.703 hospitalizados: 0,75% (e67). Se refiere a esa cohorte, no a toda NAC mundial. La rareza dificulta usar mortalidad como desenlace principal en ciertos contextos.
Multiplicar N×0,0075 da eventos esperados, no tamaño muestral requerido. Un cálculo de potencia requiere diferencia a detectar, alfa, potencia, diseño y pérdidas.
Por qué no combinar todo en un metaanálisis único
Las preguntas abarcan diagnóstico, tratamiento, prevención, alta y drenaje, con desenlaces y poblaciones diferentes. No hay un efecto común coherente para combinar. Metaanálisis por pregunta podría ser pertinente con estudios comparables; GRADE evalúa confianza y recomendación, no sustituye una fórmula de promedio.
Areas for Future Research
Objective Outcome Measures
Estandarizar gravedad y tiempos de mejoría, necesidad de soporte, complicaciones, hospitalización, estancia, readmisión y mortalidad. Ingreso y estancia también dependen de factores sociales y del sistema; no son marcadores puros de gravedad.
Cost Analysis
Costos como resultado secundario en terapias de eficacia similar; incluir costos médicos y tiempo laboral familiar. Cifras del texto están en dólares y años históricos, no precios actuales ni valores trasladables a Argentina.
Long-Term Disability
Pocas muestras pequeñas y sin medición pulmonar previa. Asociación de NAC temprana y obstrucción posterior no demuestra que la neumonía la haya causado: susceptibilidad previa puede explicar ambas.
Table 10 enumera 19 necesidades. Destaca validar interpretación radiográfica, estudiar pruebas virales y prescripción, duración eficaz mínima, drenaje y barreras de acceso.
Limitaciones y sesgos · lectura crítica
Evidencia heterogénea
Ensayos, observaciones, datos adultos y consenso. La certeza es específica de cada recomendación; no existe un solo nivel para toda la guía.
Indirectitud
Criterios de gravedad adaptados de adultos; pruebas y tratamientos de otros ámbitos. Extrapolar exige justificar población y contexto.
Selección y medición
Estudios de cultivos en quienes se estudiaron por gravedad; Rx subjetiva; patógenos con diferente facilidad de detección. Distorsionan proporciones etiológicas y rendimiento.
Confusión
Más graves reciben más imágenes, antibióticos y hospitalización. Asociaciones entre estas variables no atribuyen efectos causales.
Tiempo y alcance
US2011, búsqueda principal hasta 2010; vacunas, resistencia y terapias cambian. No aplicable automáticamente a neonatos o enfermedades fuera del alcance.
Consenso y conflictos
Proceso explícito y declaración de vínculos reducen opacidad, pero no eliminan sesgos de juicio o selección de evidencia.
Conexión con tu tesis
Permite definir recomendaciones de uso de Rx y contextualizar selección de episodios. En una muestra recuperada por Rx o antibiótico, no se puede estimar uso de Rx entre todos los niños con sospecha de NAC ni juzgar causalidad o adecuación sólo por categoría radiográfica.
Notes
Acknowledgments
Reconoce revisores y apoyo de coordinación. Las recomendaciones no son un documento oficial de CDC; la aplicación es voluntaria y debe considerar circunstancias individuales.
Financial support
Apoyo de IDSA.
Potential conflicts of interest
Se declaran ensayos, consultorías, honorarios, testimonios y financiación, incluidos vínculos de algunos autores con fabricantes de vacunas y fármacos. Consultar detalle completo en e68; no inferir sesgo demostrado a partir de la declaración.
References
Referencias del artículo original
1. Dean NC, Bateman KA, Donnelly SM, et al. Improved clinical out- comes with utilization of a community-acquired pneumonia guide- line. Chest 2006; 130:794–9. 2. McCabe C, Kirchner C, Zhang H, et al. Guideline-concordant therapy and reduced mortality and length of stay in adults with community- acquired pneumonia: playing by the rules. Arch Intern Med 2009; 169:1525–31. 3. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: an emerging con- sensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommenda- tions. BMJ 2008; 336:924–6. 4. Wardlaw T, Salama P, Johansson EW, et al. Pneumonia: the leading killer of children. Lancet 2006; 368:1048–50. 5. World Health Organization. Pneumonia. Fact sheet No. 331. 2009. Available at: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs331/en/index. html. Accessed 7 September 2010. 6. McCracken GH Jr. Etiology and treatment of pneumonia. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2000; 19:373–7. 7. McIntosh K. Community-acquired pneumonia in children. N Engl J Med 2002; 346:429–37. 8. Grijalva CG, Poehling KA, Nuorti JP, et al. National impact of uni- versal childhood immunization with pneumococcal conjugate vaccine on outpatient medical care visits in the United States. Pediatrics 2006; 118:865–73. 9. Lee GE, Lorch SA, Sheffler-Collins S, et al. National hospitalization trends for pediatric pneumonia and associated complications. Pedi- atrics 2010; 126:204–13. 10. Heron M, Hoyert DL, Murphy SL, et al. Deaths: final data for 2006. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2009; 57:1–134. 11. British Thoracic Society Standards of Care Committee. British Tho- racic Society guidelines for the management of community acquired pneumonia in childhood. Thorax 2002; 57:i1–24. 12. Lee PI, Chiu CH, Chen PY, et al. Guidelines for the management of community-acquired pneumonia in children. Acta Paediatr Taiwan 2007; 48:167–80. 13. US Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Ad- ministration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Guidance for industry. Community-acquired bacterial pneumonia: developing drugs for treatment. 2009. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/down- loads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Gui- dances/ucm123686.pdf. Accessed 7 September 2010. 14. Drummond P, Clark J, Wheeler J, et al. Community acquired pneu- monia: a prospective UK study. Arch Dis Child 2000; 83:408–12. 15. Heiskanen-Kosma T, Korppi M, Jokinen C, et al. Etiology of child- hood pneumonia: serologic results of a prospective, population-based study. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1998; 17:986–91. 16. Juven T, Mertsola J, Waris M, et al. Etiology of community-acquired pneumonia in 254 hospitalized children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2000; 19:293–8. 17. Michelow IC, Olsen K, Lozano J, et al. Epidemiology and clinical characteristics of community-acquired pneumonia in hospitalized children. Pediatrics 2004; 113:701–7. 18. Wubbel L, Muniz L, Ahmed A, et al. Etiology and treatment of community-acquired pneumonia in ambulatory children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1999; 18:98–104. 19. Bonzel L, Tenenbaum T, Schroten H, et al. Frequent detection of viral coinfection in children hospitalized with acute respiratory tract in- fection using a real-time polymerase chain reaction. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2008; 27:589–94. 20. Hamano-Hasegawa K, Morozumi M, Nakayama E, et al. Compre- hensive detection of causative pathogens using real-time PCR to di- agnose pediatric community-acquired pneumonia. J Infect Chemother 2008;1 4 : 4 2 4 – 3 2 . 21. Techasaensiri C, Messina AF, Katz K, et al. Epidemiology and evo- lution of invasive pneumococcal disease caused by multidrug resistant serotypes of 19A in the 8 years after implementation of pneumococcal conjugate vaccine immunization in Dallas, Texas. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2010; 29:294–300. 22. Brieu N, Guyon G, Rodiere M, et al. Human bocavirus infection in children with respiratory tract disease. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2008; 27:969–73. 23. Dawood FS, Fiore A, Kamimoto L, et al. Influenza-associated pneu- monia in children hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed influenza, 2003–2008. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2010; 29:585–90. 24. Ng V, Tang P, Jamieson F, et al. Laboratory-based evaluation of le- gionellosis epidemiology in Ontario, Canada, 1978 to 2006. BMC Infect Dis 2009; 9:68. 25. Tuberculosis. Red Book 2009; 2009:680–701. 26. Field MJ, Lohr KN. Institute of Medicine Committee to Advise the Public Health Service on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Clinical practice guidelines: directions for a new program. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 1990; 8. 27. Mandell LA, Wunderink RG, Anzueto A, et al. Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Thoracic Society consensus guidelines on the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 44(Suppl 2):S27–72. 28. Mace S. Pneumonia. In: Ahrens WR, Schafermeyer RW, eds. Pediatric emergency medicine. Vol. Chapter 142. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010. 29. Jadavji T, Law B, Lebel MH, et al. A practical guide for the diagnosis and treatment of pediatric pneumonia. CMAJ 1997; 156:S703–11. 30. Sandora TJ, Harper MB. Pneumonia in hospitalized children. Pediatr Clin North Am 2005; 52:1059–81, viii. 31. Kirelik S. Pneumonia. In: Marx JA, Hockenberger R, Walls RM et al. eds. Rosen’s emergency medicine concepts and clinical practice. Philadelphia, PA: Mosby Elsevier, 2008; 2554–64. 32. Fine MJ, Auble TE, Yealy DM, et al. A prediction rule to identify low- risk patients with community-acquired pneumonia. N Engl J Med 1997; 336:243–50. 33. Lim WS, van der Eerden MM, Laing R, et al. Defining community acquired pneumonia severity on presentation to hospital: an in- ternational derivation and validation study. Thorax 2003; 58:377–82. 34. Capelastegui A, Espana PP, Quintana JM, et al. Validation of a pre- dictive rule for the management of community-acquired pneumonia. Eur Respir J 2006; 27:151–7. 35. Aujesky D, Auble TE, Yealy DM, et al. Prospective comparison of three validated prediction rules for prognosis in community-acquired pneumonia. Am J Med 2005; 118:384–92. 36. Fine MJ, Stone RA, Singer DE, et al. Processes and outcomes of care for patients with community-acquired pneumonia: results from the Pneumonia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) cohort study. Arch Intern Med 1999; 159:970–80. 37. Mortensen EM, Coley CM, Singer DE, et al. Causes of death for patients with community-acquired pneumonia: results from the Pneumonia Patient Outcomes Research Team cohort study. Arch Intern Med 2002; 162:1059–64. 38. Auble TE, Yealy DM, Fine MJ. Assessing prognosis and selecting an initial site of care for adults with community-acquired pneumonia. Infect Dis Clin North Am 1998; 12:741–59, x. 39. Nazarian DJ, Eddy OL, Lukens TW, et al. 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. 40. Ruttimann UE, Pollack MM. Objective assessment of changing mortality risks in pediatric intensive care unit patients. Crit Care Med 1991; 19:474–83. 41. Peters MJ, Tasker RC, Kiff KM, et al. Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure in children: case mix and the utility of respiratory severity indices. Intensive Care Med 1998; 24:699–705. 42. Delport SD, Brisley T. Aetiology and outcome of severe community- acquired pneumonia in children admitted to a paediatric intensive care unit. S Afr Med J 2002; 92:907–11. 43. Gillet Y, Vanhems P, Lina G, et al. Factors predicting mortality in necrotizing community-acquired pneumonia caused by Staphylococ- cus aureus containing Panton-Valentine leukocidin. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 45:315–21. 4 4 . M a y o r d o m o - C o l u n g aJ ,M e d i n aA ,R e yC ,e ta l .P r e d i c t i v ef a c t o r so f non invasive ventilation failure i n critically ill children: a pro- spective epidemiological study. Intensive Care Med 2009;3 5 : 527–36. 45. Fu LY, Ruthazer R, Wilson I, et al. Brief hospitalization and pulse oximetry for predicting amoxicillin treatment failure in children with severe pneumonia. Pediatrics 2006; 118:e1822–30. 46. Niederman MS, Bass JB Jr., Campbell GD, et al. Guidelines for the initial management of adults with community-acquired pneumonia: diagnosis, assessment of severity, and initial antimicrobial therapy. American Thoracic Society. Medical Section of the American Lung Association. Am Rev Respir Dis 1993; 148:1418–26. 47. Bartlett JG, Mundy LM. Community-acquired pneumonia. N Engl J Med 1995; 333:1618–24. 48. Fine MJ, Hanusa BH, Lave JR, et al. Comparison of a disease-specific and a generic severity of illness measure for patients with community- acquired pneumonia. J Gen Intern Med 1995; 10:359–68. 49. Brown L, Dannenberg B. Pulse oximetry in discharge decision- making: a survey of emergency physicians. CJEM 2002; 4:388–93. 50. Lozano JM, Steinhoff M, Ruiz JG, et al. Clinical predictors of acute radiological pneumonia and hypoxaemia at high altitude. Arch Dis Child 1994; 71:323–7. 51. Margolis PA, Ferkol TW, Marsocci S, et al. Accuracy of the clinical examination in detecting hypoxemia in infants with respiratory ill- ness. J Pediatr 1994; 124:552–60. 52. Demers AM, Morency P, Mberyo-Yaah F, et al. Risk factors for mortality among children hospitalized because of acute respiratory infections in Bangui, Central African Republic. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2000; 19:424–32. 53. Ayieko P, English M. In children aged 2-59 months with pneumonia, which clinical signs best predict hypoxaemia? J Trop Pediatr 2006; 52:307–10. 54. Mamtani M, Patel A, Hibberd PL, et al. A clinical tool to predict failed response to therapy in children with severe pneumonia. Pediatr Pulmonol 2009; 44:379–86. 55. Smyth A, Carty H, Hart CA. Clinical predictors of hypoxaemia in children with pneumonia. Ann Trop Paediatr 1998; 18:31–40. 56. Shah S, Bachur R, Kim D, et al. Lack of predictive value of tachypnea in the diagnosis of pneumonia in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2010; 29:406–9. 57. Murtagh P, Cerqueiro C, Halac A, et al. Acute lower respiratory in- fection in Argentinian children: a 40 month clinical and epidemio- logical study. Pediatr Pulmonol 1993; 16:1–8. 58. Flores G, Abreu M, Chaisson CE, et al. Keeping children out of hospitals: parents’ and physicians’ perspectives on how pediatric hospitalizations for ambulatory care-sensitive conditions can be avoided. Pediatrics 2003; 112:1021–30. 59. Agha MM, Glazier RH, Guttmann A. Relationship between social inequalities and ambulatory care-sensitive hospitalizations persists for up to 9 years among children born in a major Canadian urban center. Ambul Pediatr 2007; 7:258–62. 60. Castaldo ET, Yang EY. Severe sepsis attributable to community- associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus : an emerging fatal problem. Am Surg 2007; 73:684–7discussion 87–8. 61. Gonzalez BE, Martinez-Aguilar G, Hulten KG, et al. Severe staphylo- coccal sepsis in adolescents in the era of community-acquired methicillin-resistantStaphylococcus aureus. Pediatrics 2005;1 1 5 : 6 4 2 – 8 . 62. Tan TQ, Mason EO Jr., Barson WJ, et al. Clinical characteristics and outcome of children with pneumonia attributable to penicillin- susceptible and penicillin-nonsusceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae . Pediatrics 1998; 102:1369–75. 63. Bender JM, Ampofo K, Gesteland P, et al. Development and valida- tion of a risk score for predicting hospitalization in children with influenza virus infection. Pediatr Emerg Care 2009; 25:369–75. 64. Louie JK, Schechter R, Honarmand S, et al. Severe pediatric influenza in California, 2003–2005: implications for immunization recom- mendations. Pediatrics 2006; 117:e610–8. 65. von Renesse A, Schildgen O, Klinkenberg D, et al. Respiratory syn- cytial virus infection in children admitted to hospital but ventilated mechanically for other reasons. J Med Virol 2009; 81:160–6. 66. Graf JM, Montagnino BA, Hueckel R, et al. Pediatric tracheostomies: a recent experience from one academic center. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2008; 9:96–100. 67. US Bureau of the Census. Statistical abstract of the United States. 127th ed. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 2008; 159. 68. Shann F, Barker J, Poore P. Clinical signs that predict death in chil- dren with severe pneumonia. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1989; 8:852–5. 69. Sebastian R, Skowronski DM, Chong M, et al. Age-related trends in the timeliness and prediction of medical visits, hospitalizations and deaths due to pneumonia and influenza, British Columbia, Canada, 1998–2004. Vaccine 2008; 26:1397–403. 70. Duncan H, Hutchison J, Parshuram CS. The Pediatric Early Warning System score: a severity of illness score to predict urgent medical need in hospitalized children. J Crit Care 2006; 21:271–8. 71. Campbell H, Byass P, Lamont AC, et al. Assessment of clinical criteria for identification of severe acute lower respiratory tract infections in children. Lancet 1989; 1:297–9. 72. Techasaensiri B, Techasaensiri C, Mejias A, et al. Viral coinfections in children with invasive pneumoco ccal disease. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2009; 29:519–23. 73. Lynch T, Bialy L, Kellner JD, et al. A systematic review on the di- agnosis of pediatric bacterial pneumonia: when gold is bronze. PLoS One 2010; 5:e11989. 74. Hickey RW, Bowman MJ, Smith GA. Utility of blood cultures in pediatric patients found to have pneumonia in the emergency de- partment. Ann Emerg Med 1996; 27:721–5. 75. Shah SS, Alpern ER, Zwerling L, et al. Risk of bacteremia in young children with pneumonia treated as outpatients. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2003; 157:389–92. 76. Claesson BA, Trollfors B, Brolin I, et al. Etiology of community- acquired pneumonia in children based on antibody responses to bacterial and viral antigens. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1989; 8:856–62. 77. Tsarouhas N, Shaw KN, Hodinka RL, et al. Effectiveness of in- tramuscular penicillin versus oral amoxicillin in the early treatment of outpatient pediatric pneumonia. Pediatr Emerg Care 1998; 14:338–41. 78. Bonadio WA. Bacteremia in febrile children with lobar pneumonia and leukocytosis. Pediatr Emerg Care 1988; 4:241–2. 79. Black SB, Shinefield HR, Ling S, et al. Effectiveness of heptavalent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in children younger than five years of age for prevention of pneumonia. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2002; 21:810–5. 80. Shah SS, Dugan MH, Bell LM, et al. Blood cultures in the emergency department evaluation of childhood pneumonia. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2011; 30:475–79. 81. Alpern ER, Alessandrini EA, Bell LM, et al. Occult bacteremia from a pediatric emergency department: current prevalence, time to de- tection, and outcome. Pediatrics 2000; 106:505–11. 82. Stoll ML, Rubin LG. Incidence o f occult bacteremia among highly febrile young children in the era of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine: a study from a Children’s Hospital Emergency De- partment and Urgent Care Center. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2004; 158:671–5. 83. Herz AM, Greenhow TL, Alcantara J, et al. Changing epidemiology of outpatient bacteremia in 3- to 36-month-old children after the in- troduction of the heptavalent-conjugated pneumococcal vaccine. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2006; 25:293–300. 84. Sard B, Bailey MC, Vinci R. An analysis of pediatric blood cultures in the postpneumococcal conjugate vaccine era in a community hospital emergency department. Pediatr Emerg Care 2006; 22:295–300. 85. Mtunthama N, Gordon SB, Kusimbwe T, et al. Blood culture col- lection technique and pneumococcal surveillance in Malawi during the four year period 2003–2006: an observational study. BMC Infect Dis 2008; 8:137. 86. Petti CA, Woods CW, Reller LB. Streptococcus pneumoniae antigen test using positive blood culture bottles as an alternative method to diagnose pneumococcal bacteremia. J Clin Microbiol 2005;4 3 : 2510–2. 87. Resti M, Micheli A, Moriondo M, et al. Comparison of the effect of antibiotic treatment on the possibility of diagnosing invasive pneu- mococcal disease by culture or molecular methods: a prospective, observational study of children and adolescents with proven pneu- mococcal infection. Clin Ther 2009; 31:1266–73. 88. Sandora TJ, Desai R, Miko BA, et al. Assessing quality indicators for pediatric community-acquired pneumonia. Am J Med Qual 2009; 24:419–27. 89. Byington CL, Spencer LY, Johnson TA, et al. An epidemiological investigation of a sustained high rate of pediatric parapneumonic empyema: risk factors and microbiological associations. Clin Infect Dis 2002; 34:434–40. 90. Freij BJ, Kusmiesz H, Nelson JD, et al. Parapneumonic effusions and empyema in hospitalized children: a retrospective review of 227 cases. Pediatr Infect Dis 1984; 3:578–91. 91. Hoff SJ, Neblett WW, Edwards KM, et al. Parapneumonic empyema in children: decortication hastens recovery in patients with severe pleural infections. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1991; 10:194–9. 92. St Peter SD, Tsao K, Spilde TL, et al. Thoracoscopic decortication vs tube thoracostomy with fibrinolysis for empyema in children: a prospective, randomized trial. J Pediatr Surg 2009; 44:106–11; discussion 11. 93. Buckingham SC, King MD, Miller ML. Incidence and etiologies of complicated parapneumonic effusions in children, 1996 to 2001. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2003; 22:499–504. 94. Campbell SG, Marrie TJ, Anstey R, et al. The contribution of blood cultures to the clinical management of adult patients admitted to the hospital with community-acquired pneumonia: a prospective obser- vational study. Chest 2003; 123:1142–50. 95. Corbo J, Friedman B, Bijur P, et al. Limited usefulness of initial blood cultures in community acquired pneumonia. Emerg Med J 2004; 21:446–8. 96. Kennedy M, Bates DW, Wright SB, et al. Do emergency department blood cultures change practice in patients with pneumonia? Ann Emerg Med 2005; 46:393–400. 97. Afshar N, Tabas J, Afshar K, et al. Blood cultures for community- acquired pneumonia: are they worthy of two quality measures? A systematic review. J Hosp Med 2009; 4:112–23. 98. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Licensure of a 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) and recommendations for use among children: Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2010; 59:258–61. 99. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Invasive pneumococcal disease in young children before licensure of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine: United States, 2007. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2010; 59:253–7. 100. Ishida T, Hashimoto T, Arita M, et al. A 3-year prospective study of a urinary antigen-detection test for Streptococcus pneumoniae in community-acquired pneumonia: utility and clinical impact on the reported etiology. J Infect Chemother 2004; 10:359–63. 101. Roson B, Fernandez-Sabe N, Carratala J, et al. Contribution of a uri- nary antigen assay (Binax NOW) to the early diagnosis of pneumo- coccal pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 38:222–6. 102. Neuman MI, Harper MB. Evaluation of a rapid urine antigen assay for the detection of invasive pneumococcal disease in children. Pediatrics 2003; 112:1279–82. 103. Dowell SF, Garman RL, Liu G, et al. Evaluation of Binax NOW, an assay for the detection of pneumococcal antigen in urine samples, performed among pediatric patients. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32:824–5. 104. Esposito S, Bosis S, Colombo R, et al. Evaluation of rapid assay for detection of Streptococcus pneumoniae urinary antigen among infants and young children with possible invasive pneumococcal disease. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2004; 23:365–7. 105. Charkaluk ML, Kalach N, Mvogo H, et al. Assessment of a rapid urinary antigen detection by an immunochromatographic test for diagnosis of pneumococcal infection in children. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2006; 55:89–94. 106. Bonner AB, Monroe KW, Talley LI, et al. Impact of the rapid diagnosis of influenza on physician decision-making and patient management in the pediatric emergency department: results of a randomized, prospective, controlled trial. Pediatrics 2003; 112:363–7. 107. Esposito S, Marchisio P, Morelli P, et al. Effect of a rapid influenza diagnosis. Arch Dis Child 2003; 88:525–6. 108. Iyer SB, Gerber MA, Pomerantz WJ, et al. Effect of point-of-care influenza testing on management of febrile children. Acad Emerg Med 2006; 13:1259–68. 109. Benito-Fernandez J, Vazquez-Ronco MA, Morteruel-Aizkuren E, et al. Impact of rapid viral testing for influenza A and B viruses on man- agement of febrile infants without signs of focal infection. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2006; 25:1153–7. 110. Abanses JC, Dowd MD, Simon SD, et al. Impact of rapid influenza testing at triage on management of febrile infants and young children. Pediatr Emerg Care 2006; 22:145–9. 111. Doan QH, Kissoon N, Dobson S, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of the impact of early and rapid diagnosis of viral infections in chil- dren brought to an emergency department with febrile respiratory tract illnesses. J Pediatr 2009; 154:91–5. 112. Falsey AR, Murata Y, Walsh EE. Impact of rapid diagnosis on man- agement of adults hospitalized with influenza. Arch Intern Med 2007; 167:354–60. 113. Byington CL, Castillo H, Gerber K, et al. The effect of rapid re- spiratory viral diagnostic testing on antibiotic use in a children’s hospital. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2002; 156:1230–4. 114. Louie JK, Guevara H, Boston E, et al. Rapid influenza antigen test for diagnosis of pandemic (H1N1) 2009. Emerg Infect Dis 2010;1 6 : 8 2 4 – 6 . 115. Bhat N, Wright JG, Broder KR, et al. Influenza-associated deaths among children in the United States, 2003–2004. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:2559–67. 116. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Surveillance for pediatric deaths associated with 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus in- fection: United States, April–August 2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2009; 58:941–7. 117. Levin D, Tribuzio M, Green-Wrzesinki T, et al. Empiric antibiotics are justified for infants with respiratory syncytial virus lower respiratory tract infection presenting with respiratory failure: a prospective study and evidence review. Pediatr Crit Care Med 2010; 11:390–5. 118. Block S, Hedrick J, Hammerschlag MR, et al. Mycoplasma pneumoniae and Chlamydia pneumoniae in pediatric community-acquired pneu- monia: comparative efficacy and safety of clarithromycin vs. eryth- romycin ethylsuccinate. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1995; 14:471–7. 119. Gendrel D. Antibiotic treatment of Mycoplasma pneumoniae in- fections. Pediatr Pulmonol Suppl 1997; 16:46–7. 120. Harris JA, Kolokathis A, Campbell M, et al. Safety and efficacy of azithromycin in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1998; 17:865–71. 121. Korppi M, Heiskanen-Kosma T, Kleemola M. Incidence of community- acquired pneumonia in children caused by Mycoplasma pneumoniae: serological results of a prospective, population-based study in primary health care. Respirology 2004; 9:109–14. 122. Glezen WP, Loda FA, Clyde WA Jr, et al. Epidemiologic patterns of acute lower respiratory disease of children in a pediatric group practice. J Pediatr 1971; 78:397–406. 123. Marmion BP. Eaton agent–science and scientific acceptance: a his- torical commentary. Rev Infect Dis 1990; 12:338–53. 124. Alexander TS, Gray LD, Kraft JA, et al. Performance of Meridian ImmunoCard Mycoplasma test in a multicenter clinical trial. J Clin Microbiol 1996; 34:1180–3. 125. Dunn JJ, Malan AK, Evans J, et al. Rapid detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae IgM antibodies in pediatric patients using ImmunoCard Mycoplasma compared to conventional enzyme immunoassays. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2004; 23:412–4. 126. Thurman KA, Walter ND, Schwartz SB, et al. Comparison of labo- ratory diagnostic procedures for detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae in community outbreaks. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48:1244–9. 127. Waris ME, Toikka P, Saarinen T, et al. Diagnosis of Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia in children. J Clin Microbiol 1998;3 6 : 3 1 5 5 – 9 . 128. Bernet C, Garret M, de Barbeyrac B, et al. Detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae by using the polymerase chain reaction. J Clin Microbiol 1989; 27:2492–6. 129. Hardegger D, Nadal D, Bossart W, et al. Rapid detection of Myco- plasma pneumoniae in clinical samples by real-time PCR. J Microbiol Methods 2000; 41:45–51. 130. Jensen JS, Sondergard-Andersen J, Uldum SA, et al. Detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae in simulated clinical samples by polymerase chain reaction. Brief report. APMIS 1989; 97:1046–8. 131. Luneberg E, Jensen JS, Frosch M. Detection of Mycoplasma pneu- moniae by polymerase chain reaction and nonradioactive hybridiza- tion in microtiter plates. J Clin Microbiol 1993; 31:1088–94. 132. Nadala D, Bossart W, Zucol F, et al. Community-acquired pneumonia in children due to Mycoplasma pneumoniae: diagnostic performance of a seminested 16S rDNA-PCR. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis2001; 39:15–9. 133. Dowell SF, Peeling RW, Boman J, et al. Standardizing Chlamydia pneumoniae assays: recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (USA) and the Laboratory Centre for Disease Control (Canada). Clin Infect Dis 2001; 33:492–503. 134. Copelovitch L, Kaplan BS. Streptococcus pneumoniae –associated he- molytic uremic syndrome: classification and the emergence of sero- type 19A. Pediatrics 2010; 125:e174–82. 135. Waters AM, Kerecuk L, Luk D, et al. Hemolytic uremic syndrome associated with invasive pneumococcal disease: the United Kingdom experience. J Pediatr 2007; 151:140–4. 136. Brandt J, Wong C, Mihm S, et al. Invasive pneumococcal disease and hemolytic uremic syndrome. Pediatrics 2002; 110:371–6. 137. Bender JM, Ampofo K, Byington CL, et al. Epidemiology of Strepto- coccus pneumoniae -induced hemolytic uremic syndrome in Utah children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2010; 29:712–6. 138. Korppi M, Heiskanen-Kosma T, Leinonen M. White blood cells, C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate in pneumo- coccal pneumonia in children. Eur Respir J 1997; 10:1125–9. 139. Bachur R, Perry H, Harper MB. Occult pneumonias: empiric chest radiographs in febrile children with leukocytosis. Ann Emerg Med 1999; 33:166–73. 140. Murphy CG, van de Pol AC, Harper MB, et al. Clinical predictors of occult pneumonia in the febrile child. Acad Emerg Med 2007; 14:243–9. 141. Rutman MS, Bachur R, Harper MB. Radiographic pneumonia in young, highly febrile children with leukocytosis before and after universal conjugate pneumococcal vaccination. Pediatr Emerg Care 2009; 25:1–7. 142. Nohynek H, Valkeila E, Leinonen M, et al. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate, white blood cell count and serum C-reactive protein in assessing etiologic diagnosis of acute lower respiratory infections in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1995; 14:484–90. 143. Korppi M, Remes S. Serum procalcitonin in pneumococcal pneu- monia in children. Eur Respir J 2001; 17:623–7. 144. Korppi M, Remes S, Heiskanen-Kosma T. Serum procalcitonin concentrations in bacterial pneumonia in children: a negative result in primary healthcare settings. Pediatr Pulmonol 2003; 35:56–61. 145. Toikka P, Irjala K, Juven T, et al. Serum procalcitonin, C-reactive protein and interleukin-6 for distinguishing bacterial and viral pneumonia in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2000; 19:598–602. 146. Moulin F, Raymond J, Lorrot M, et al. Procalcitonin in children admitted to hospital with community acquired pneumonia. Arch Dis Child 2001; 84:332–6. 147. Khan DA, Rahman A, Khan FA. Is procalcitonin better than C- reactive protein for early diagnosis of bacterial pneumonia in chil- dren? J Clin Lab Anal 2010; 24:1–5. 148. Prat C, Dominguez J, Rodrigo C, et al. Procalcitonin, C-reactive protein and leukocyte count in children with lower respiratory tract infection. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2003; 22:963–8. 149. Nascimento-Carvalho CM, Cardoso MR, Barral A, et al. Procalcitonin is useful in identifying bacteraemia among children with pneumonia. Scand J Infect Dis 2010; 42:644–9. 150. Swingler GH, Zwarenstein M. Chest radiograph in acute respiratory infections. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008; 23:CD001268. 151. Swingler GH, Hussey GD, Zwarenstein M. Randomised controlled trial of clinical outcome after chest radiograph in ambulatory acute lower-respiratory infection in children. Lancet 1998; 351:404–8. 152. Novack V, Avnon LS, Smolyakov A, et al. Disagreement in the in- terpretation of chest radiographs among specialists and clinical out- comes of patients hospitalized with suspected pneumonia. Eur J Intern Med 2006; 17:43–7. 153. Alario AJ, McCarthy PL, Markowitz R, et al. Usefulness of chest ra- diographs in children with acute lower respiratory tract disease. J Pediatr 1987; 111:187–93. 154. Grossman LK, Caplan SE. Clinical, laboratory, and radiological in- formation in the diagnosis of pneumonia in children. Ann Emerg Med 1988; 17:43–6. 155. Bushyhead JB, Wood RW, Tompkins RK, et al. The effect of chest radiographs on the management and clinical course of patients with acute cough. Med Care 1983; 21:661–73. 156. Mathews B, Shah S, Cleveland RH, et al. Clinical predictors of pneumonia among children with wheezing. Pediatrics 2009; 124: e29–36. 157. Homier V, Bellavance C, Xhignesse M. Prevalence of pneumonia in children under 12 years of age who undergo abdominal radiography in the emergency department. CJEM 2007; 9:347–51. 158. Bloomfield FH, Teele RL, Voss M, et al. Inter- and intra-observer variability in the assessment of atelectasis and consolidation in neo- natal chest radiographs. Pediatr Radiol 1999; 29:459–62. 159. Albaum MN, Hill LC, Murphy M, et al. Interobserver reliability of the chest radiograph in community-acquired pneumonia. PORT Inves- tigators. Chest 1996; 110:343–50. 160. Johnson J, Kline JA. Intraobserver and interobserver agreement of the interpretation of pediatric chest radiographs. Emerg Radiol 2010; 17:285–90. 161. Hopstaken RM, Witbraad T, van Engelshoven JM, et al. Inter- observer variation in the interpretation of chest radiographs for pneumonia in community-acquired lower respiratory tract infections. Clin Radiol 2004; 59:743–52. 162. Tudor GR, Finlay D, Taub N. An assessment of inter-observer agreement and accuracy when reporting plain radiographs. Clin Ra- diol 1997; 52:235–8. 163. Stickler GB, Hoffman AD, Taylor WF. Problems in the clinical and roentgenographic diagnosis of pneumonia in young children. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 1984; 23:398–9. 164. Davies HD, Wang EE, Manson D, et al. Reliability of the chest ra- diograph in the diagnosis of lower respiratory infections in young children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1996; 15:600–4. 165. Young M, Marrie TJ. Interobserver variability in the interpretation of chest roentgenograms of patients with possible pneumonia. Arch Intern Med 1994; 154:2729–32. 166. Cherian T, Mulholland EK, Carlin JB, et al. Standardized in- terpretation of paediatric chest radiographs for the diagnosis of pneumonia in epidemiological studies. Bull World Health Organ 2005; 83:353–9. 167. Gatt ME, Spectre G, Paltiel O, et al. Chest radiographs in the emergency department: is the radiologist really necessary? Postgrad Med J 2003; 79:214–7. 168. Gibson NA, Hollman AS, Paton JY. Value of radiological follow up of childhood pneumonia. BMJ 1993; 307:1117. 169. Virkki R, Juven T, Mertsola J, et al. Radiographic follow-up of pneumonia in children. Pediatr Pulmonol 2005; 40:223–7. 170. Grossman LK, Wald ER, Nair P, et al. Roentgenographic follow-up of acute pneumonia in children. Pediatrics 1979; 63:30–1. 171. Wacogne I, Negrine RJ. Are follow up chest x ray examinations helpful in the management of children recovering from pneumonia? Arch Dis Child 2003; 88:457–8. 172. Heaton P, Arthur K. The utility of chest radiography in the follow-up of pneumonia. N Z Med J 1998; 111:315–7. 173. Bruns AH, Oosterheert JJ, Prokop M, et al. Patterns of resolution of chest radiograph abnormalities in adults hospitalized with severe community-acquired pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 45: 983–91. 174. Fiorino EK, Panitch HB. Recurrent pneumonia. In: Shah SS, ed. Pe- diatric practice: infectious diseases. New York: McGraw-Hill Medical, 2009: 321–31. 175. Uyeki T. Diagnostic testing for 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus infection in hospitalized patients. New Engl J Med 2009; 361:e114. 176. Bar-Zohar D, Sivan Y. The yield of flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy in pediatric intensive care patients. Chest 2004; 126:1353–9. 177. Tang LF, Chen ZM. Fiberoptic bronchoscopy in neonatal and pedi- atric intensive care units: a 5-year experience. Med Princ Pract 2009; 18:305–9. 178. Manali E, Papadopoulos A, Tsiodras S, et al. The impact on com- munity acquired pneumonia empirical therapy of diagnostic bron- choscopic techniques. Scand J Infect Dis 2008; 40:286–92. 179. Fagon JY, Chastre J, Wolff M, et al. Invasive and noninvasive strategies for management of suspected ventilator-associated pneu- monia. A randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2000; 132:621–30. 180. Chastre J, Fagon JY. Ventilator-associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002; 165:867–903. 181. Gauvin F, Lacroix J, Guertin MC, et al. Reproducibility of blind protected bronchoalveolar lavage in mechanically ventilated children. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002; 165:1618–23. 182. Labenne M, Poyart C, Rambaud C, et al. Blind protected specimen brush and bronchoalveolar lavage in ventilated children. Crit Care Med 1999; 27:2537–43. 183. Vuori-Holopainen E, Salo E, Saxen H, et al. Etiological diagnosis of childhood pneumonia by use of tran sthoracic needle aspiration and modern microbiological methods. Clin Infect Dis 2002; 34:583–90. 184. Manhire A, Charig M, Clelland C, et al. Guidelines for radiologically guided lung biopsy. Thorax 2003; 58:920–36. 185. Kornecki A, Shemie SD. Open lung biopsy in children with re- spiratory failure. Crit Care Med 2001; 29:1247–50. 186. Acosta EP, Kimberlin DW. Determination of appropriate dosing of influenza drugs in pediatric patients. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2010. 187. American Academy of Pediatrics. Committee on Infectious Diseases. Policy statement: recommendations for prevention and control of influenza in children, 2010–2011. Pediatrics 2010; 126:816–26. 188. Klein JO. Bacterial pneumonias. In: Cherry J, Kaplan S, Demmler- Harrison G eds. Feigin & Cherry’s textbook of pediatric infectious dis- eases, 6th ed. Vol 1. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders/Elsevier, 2009; 302–14. 189. Weinstein MP, Klugman KP, Jones RN. Rationale for revised peni- cillin susceptibility breakpoints versus Streptococcus pneumoniae : coping with antimicrobial susceptibility in an era of resistance. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48:1596–600. 190. Dagan R, Hoberman A, Johnson C, et al. Bacteriologic and clinical efficacy of high dose amoxicillin/clavulanate in children with acute otitis media. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2001; 20:829–37. 191. Hazir T, Qazi SA, Bin Nisar Y, et al. Comparison of standard versus double dose of amoxicillin in the treatment of non-severe pneu- monia in children aged 2–59 months: a multi-centre, double blind, randomised controlled trial in Pakistan. Arch Dis Child 2007; 92:291–7. 192. Bradley JS, Garonzik SM, Forrest A, et al. Pharmacokinetics, phar- macodynamics, and Monte Carlo simulation: selecting the best anti- microbial dose to treat an infection. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2010; 29:1043–6. 193. Bradley JS, Garonzik SM, Forrest A, et al. Pharmacokinetics, phar- macodynamics, and Monte Carlo simulation: selecting the best anti- microbial dose to treat an infection. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2010; 29:1043–46. 194. Kyaw MH, Lynfield R, Schaffner W, et al. Effect of introduction of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine on drug-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae. N Engl J Med 2006; 354:1455–63. 195. Harrison CJ, Woods C, Stout G, et al. Susceptibilities of Haemo- philus influenzae , Streptococcus pneumoniae, including serotype 19A, and Moraxella catarrhalis paediatric isolates from 2005 to 2007 to commonly used antibiotics. J Antimicrob Chemother 2009; 63:511–9. 196. Morita JY, Kahn E, Thompson T, et al. Impact of azithromycin on oropharyngeal carriage of group A Streptococcus and nasopharyngeal carriage of macrolide-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae . Pediatr Infect Dis J 2000; 19:41–6. 197. Sader HS, Jacobs MR, Fritsche TR. Review of the spectrum and po- tency of orally administered cephalosporins and amoxicillin/ clavulanate. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2007; 57:5S–12S. 198. Pallares R, Capdevila O, Linares J, et al. The effect of cephalosporin resistance on mortality in adult patients with nonmeningeal systemic pneumococcal infections. Am J Med 2002; 113:120–6. 199. Roson B, Carratala J, Tubau F, et al. Usefulness of betalactam therapy for community-acquired pneumonia in the era of drug-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae : a randomized study of amoxicillin- clavulanate and ceftriaxone. Microb Drug Resist 2001; 7:85–96. 200. Chumpa A, Bachur RG, Harper MB. Bacteremia-associated pneu- mococcal pneumonia and the benefit of initial parenteral anti- microbial therapy. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1999; 18:1081–5. 201. Lappin E, Ferguson AJ. Gram-positive toxic shock syndromes. Lancet Infect Dis 2009; 9:281–90. 202. Forrest GN, Tamura K. Rifampin combination therapy for non- mycobacterial infections. Clin Microbiol Rev 2010; 23:14–34. 203. Como-Sabetti K, Harriman KH, Buck JM, et al. Community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: trends in case and isolate characteristics from six years of prospective surveillance. Public Health Rep 2009; 124:427–35. 204. Miller LG, Kaplan SL. Staphylococcus aureus: a community pathogen. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2009; 23:35–52. 205. Mulholland S, Gavranich JB, Chang AB. Antibiotics for community- acquired lower respiratory tract infections secondary to Mycoplasma pneumoniae in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010; 7:CD004875. 206. Matsubara K, Morozumi M, Okada T, et al. A comparative clinical study of macrolide-sensitive and macrolide-resistantMycoplasma pneumoniae infections in pediatric patients. J Infect Chemother2009; 15:380–3. 207. Kingston JR, Chanock RM, Mufson MA, et al. Eaton agent pneu- monia. JAMA 1961; 176:118–23. 208. Rasch JR, Mogabgab WJ. Therapeutic effect of erythromycin on Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother (Bethesda) 1965; 5:693–9. 209. Plouffe JF. Importance of atypical pathogens of community-acquired pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 31(Suppl 2):S35–9. 210. Bradley JS, Arguedas A, Blumer JL, et al. Comparative study of levofloxacin in the treatment of children with community-acquired pneumonia. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2007; 26:868–78. 211. Burillo A, Bouza E. Chlamydophila pneumoniae. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2010; 24:61–71. 212. Hammerschlag MR. Pneumonia due to Chlamydia pneumoniae in children: epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Pediatr Pulmonol 2003; 36:384–90. 213. Heinonen S, Silvennoinen H, Lehtinen P, et al. Early oseltamivir treatment of influenza in children 1-3 years of age: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis 2010; 51:887–94. 214. McGeer A, Green KA, Plevneshi A, et al. Antiviral therapy and out- comes of influenza requiring hospitalization in Ontario, Canada. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 45:1568–75. 215. Siston AM, Rasmussen SA, Honein MA, et al. Pandemic 2009 in- fluenza A(H1N1) virus illness among pregnant women in the United States. JAMA 2010; 303:1517–25. 216. Farias JA, Fernandez A, Monteverde E, et al. Critically ill infants and children with influenza A (H1N1) in pediatric intensive care units in Argentina. Intensive Care Med 2010; 36:1015–22. 217. Lee N, Choi KW, Chan PK, et al. Outcomes of adults hospitalised with severe influenza. Thorax 2010; 65:510–5. 218. Wildschut ED, de Hoog M, Ahsman MJ, et al. Plasma concentrations of oseltamivir and oseltamivir carboxylate in critically ill children on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support. PLoS One 2010; 5:e10938. 219. Harper SA, Bradley JS, Englund JA, et al. Seasonal influenza in adults and children: diagnosis, treatment, chemoprophylaxis, and in- stitutional outbreak management: clinical practice guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48:1003–32. 220. Committee on Infectious Diseases. From the American Academy of Pediatrics: policy statements—modified recommendations for use of palivizumab for prevention of respiratory syncytial virus infections. Pediatrics 2009; 124:1694–701. 221. Carbonell-Estrany X, Simoes EA, Dagan R, et al. Motavizumab for prophylaxis of respiratory syncytial virus in high-risk children: a noninferiority trial. Pediatrics 2010; 125:e35–51. 222. Patel SJ, Larson EL, Kubin CJ, et al. A review of antimicrobial control strategies in hospitalized and ambulatory pediatric populations. Pe- diatr Infect Dis J 2007; 26:531–7. 223. Haider BA, Saeed MA, Bhutta ZA. Short-course versus long-course antibiotic therapy for non-severe community-acquired pneumonia in children aged 2 months to 59 months. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008; 16:CD005976. 224. Tice AD, Rehm SJ, Dalovisio JR, et al. Practice guidelines for out- patient parenteral antimicrobial therapy. IDSA guidelines. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 38:1651–72. 225. Bradley JS, Ching DK, Hart CL. Invasive bacterial disease in child- hood: efficacy of oral antibiotic therapy following short course par- enteral therapy in non-central nervous system infections. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1987; 6:821–5. 226. Blaschke AJ, Heyrend C, Byington CL, et al. Molecular analysis im- proves pathogen identification and epidemiologic study of pediatric parapneumonic empyema. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2011; 30:289–94. 227. Spellberg B, Talbot GH, Brass EP, et al. Position paper: recommended design features of future clinical trials of antibacterial agents for community-acquired pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis 2008;4 7 ( S u p p l3 ) : S249–65. 228. Bradley JS, McCracken GH. Unique considerations in the evaluation of antibacterials in clinical trials for pediatric community-acquired pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 47(Suppl 3):S241–8. 229. Hasley PB, Albaum MN, Li YH, et al. Do pulmonary radiographic findings at presentation predict mortality in patients with community-acquired pneu monia? Arch Intern Med 1996; 156:2206–12. 230. Senstad AC, Suren P, Brauteset L, et al. Community-acquired pneu- monia (CAP) in children in Oslo, Norway. Acta Paediatr2009; 98:332–6. 231. Clark JE, Hammal D, Spencer D, et al. Children with pneumonia: how do they present and how are they managed? Arch Dis Child 2007; 92:394–8. 232. Bueno Campana M, Agundez Reigosa B, Jimeno Ruiz S, et al. Is the incidence of parapneumonic pleural effusion increasing? Pediatr (Barc) 2008; 68:92–8. 233. Weigl JA, Puppe W, Belke O, et al. Population-based incidence of severe pneumonia in children in Kiel, Germany. Klin Padiatr 2005; 217:211–9. 234. Fine NL, Smith LR, Sheedy PF. Frequency of pleural effusions in mycoplasma and viral pneumonias. N Engl J Med 1970; 283:790–3. 235. Light RW. Pleural diseases. Dis Mon 1992; 38:261–331. 236. Byington CL, Korgenski K, Daly J, et al. Impact of the pneumococcal conjugate vaccine on pneumococcal parapneumonic empyema. Pe- diatr Infect Dis J 2006; 25:250–4. 237. Byington CL, Samore MH, Stoddard GJ, et al. Temporal trends of invasive disease due to Streptococcus pneumoniae among children in the intermountain west: emergence of nonvaccine serogroups. Clin Infect Dis 2005; 41:21–9. 238. Hendrickson DJ, Blumberg DA, Joad JP, et al. Five-fold increase in pediatric parapneumonic empyema since introduction of pneu- mococcal conjugate vacci ne. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2008; 27: 1030–2. 239. Lahti E, Peltola V, Virkki R, et al. Development of parapneumonic empyema in children. Acta Paediatr 2007; 96:1686–92. 240. Chan W, Keyser-Gauvin E, Davis GM, et al. Empyema thoracis in children: a 26-year review of the Montreal Children’s Hospital ex- perience. J Pediatr Surg 1997; 32:870–2. 241. Balfour-Lynn IM, Abrahamson E, Cohen G, et al. BTS guidelines for the management of pleural infection in children. Thorax 2005; 60(Suppl 1):i1–21. 242. Light RW. Parapneumonic effusions and empyema. Proc Am Thorac Soc 2006; 3:75–80. 243. Colice GL, Curtis A, Deslauriers J, et al. Medical and surgical treat- ment of parapneumonic effusions: an evidence-based guideline. Chest 2000; 118:1158–71. 244. Prais D, Kuzmenko E, Amir J, et al. Association of hypoalbuminemia with the presence and size of pleural effusion in children with pneumonia. Pediatrics 2008; 121:e533–8. 245. Carter E, Waldhausen J, Zhang W, et al. Management of children with empyema: pleural drainage is not always necessary. Pediatr Pulmonol 2010; 45:475–80. 246. Ferguson AD, Prescott RJ, Selkon JB, et al. The clinical course and management of thoracic empyema. QJM 1996; 89:285–9. 247. Ramnath RR, Heller RM, Ben-Ami T, et al. Implications of early sonographic evaluation of parapneumonic effusions in children with pneumonia. Pediatrics 1998; 101:68–71. 248. Himelman RB, Callen PW. The prognostic value of loculations in parapneumonic pleural effusions. Chest 1986; 90:852–6. 249. Casado Flores J, Nieto Moro M, Berron S, et al. Usefulness of pneu- mococcal antigen detection in pleural effusion for the rapid diagnosis of infection by Streptococcus pneumoniae. Eur J Pediatr 2009. 250. Obando I, Munoz-Almagro C, Arroyo LA, et al. Pediatric para- pneumonic empyema, Spain. Emerg Infect Dis 2008; 14:1390–7. 251. Goldbart AD, Leibovitz E, Porat N, et al. Complicated community acquired pneumonia in children prior to the introduction of the pneumococcal conjugated vaccine. Scand J Infect Dis 2009; 41:182–7. 252. Kunyoshi V, Cataneo DC, Cataneo AJ. Complicated pneumonias with empyema and/or pneumatocele in children. Pediatr Surg Int 2006; 22:186–90. 253. Schultz KD, Fan LL, Pinsky J, et al. The changing face of pleural empyemas in children: epidemiology and management. Pediatrics 2004; 113:1735–40. 254. Hernandez-Bou S, Garcia-Garcia JJ, Esteva C, et al. Pediatric parapneumonic pleural effusion: epidemiology, clinical character- istics, and microbiological diagnosis. Pediatr Pulmonol 2009;4 4 : 1192–200. 255. Ani A, Okpe S, Akambi M, et al. Comparison of a DNA based PCR method with conventional methods for the detection of M. tuber- culosis in Jos, Nigeria. J Infect Dev Ctries 2009; 3:470–5. 256. Le Monnier A, Carbonnelle E, Zahar JR, et al. Microbiological di- agnosis of empyema in children: comparative evaluations by culture, polymerase chain reaction, and pneumococcal antigen detection in pleural fluids. Clin Infect Dis 2006; 42:1135–40. 257. Ploton C, Freydiere AM, Benito Y, et al. Streptococcus pneumoniae thoracic empyema in children: rapid diagnosis by using the Binax NOW immunochromatographic membrane test in pleural fluids. Pathol Biol (Paris) 2006; 54:498–501. 258. Tarrago D, Fenoll A, Sanchez-Tatay D, et al. Identification of pneu- mococcal serotypes from culture-negative clinical specimens by novel real-time PCR. Clin Microbiol Infect 2008; 14:828–34. 259. Ampofo K, Herbener A, Blaschke AJ, et al. Association of 2009 pan- demic influenza A (H1N1) infection and increased hospitalization with parapneumonic empyema in children in Utah. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2010; 29:905–9. 260. Lahti E, Mertsola J, Kontiokari T, et al. Pneumolysin polymerase chain reaction for diagnosis of pneumococcal pneumonia and em- pyema in children. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2006; 25:783–9. 261. Heffner JE, Brown LK, Barbieri C, et al. Pleural fluid chemical analysis in parapneumonic effusions. A meta-analysis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995; 151:1700–8. 262. Mitri RK, Brown SD, Zurakowski D, et al. Outcomes of primary image-guided drainage of parapneumonic effusions in children. Pe- diatrics 2002; 110:e37. 263. Picard E, Joseph L, Goldberg S, et al. Predictive factors of morbidity in childhood parapneumonic effusion-associated pneumonia: a retro- spective study. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2010; 29:840–3. 264. Burgess LJ, Maritz FJ, Le Roux I, et al. Combined use of pleural adenosine deaminase with lymphocyte/neutrophil ratio. Increased specificity for the diagnosis of tuberculous pleuritis. Chest 1996; 109:414–9. 265. Chiu CY, Wu JH, Wong KS. Clinical spectrum of tuberculous pleural effusion in children. Pediatr Int 2007; 49:359–62. 266. Hawkins JA, Scaife ES, Hillman ND, et al. Current treatment of pe- diatric empyema. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2004; 16:196–200. 267. Sonnappa S, Cohen G, Owens CM, et al. Comparison of urokinase and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for treatment of childhood empyema. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2006; 174:221–7. 268. Grewal H, Jackson RJ, Wagner CW, et al. Early video-assisted thoracic surgery in the management of empyema. Pediatrics 1999; 103:e63. 269. Kokoska ER, Chen MK. Position paper on video-assisted thoraco- scopic surgery as treatment of pediatric empyema. J Pediatr Surg 2009; 44:289–93. 270. Shah SS, DiCristina CM, Bell LM, et al. Primary early thoracoscopy and reduction in length of hospital stay and additional procedures among children with complicated pneumonia: results of a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2008; 162: 675–81. 271. Kurt BA, Winterhalter KM, Connors RH, et al. Therapy of para- pneumonic effusions in children: video-assisted thoracoscopic sur- gery versus conventional thoracostomy drainage. Pediatrics 2006; 118:e547–53. 272. Menendez R, Torres A. Treatment failure in community-acquired pneumonia. Chest 2007; 132:1348–55. 273. Genne D, Kaiser L, Kinge TN, et al. Community-acquired pneumonia: causes of treatment failure in patients enrolled in clinical trials. Clin Microbiol Infect 2003; 9:949–54. 274. Casado Flores J, Nieto Moro M, Berron S, et al. Usefulness of pneu- mococcal antigen detection in pleural effusion for the rapid diagnosis of infection by Streptococcus pneumoniae . Eur J Pediatr 2010; 169:581–4. 275. Deresinski S. Vancomycin heteroresistance and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Infect Dis 2009; 199:605–9. 276. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Bacterial coinfections in lung tissue specimens from fatal cases of 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1)—United States, May–August 2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2009; 58:1071–4. 277. Ampofo K, Bender J, Sheng X, et al. Seasonal invasive pneumococcal disease in children: role of preceding respiratory viral infection. Pe- diatrics 2008; 122:229–37. 278. Jansen AG, Sanders EA, van der Ende A, et al. Invasive pneumo- coccal and meningococcal disease: association with influenza virus and respiratory syncytial virus activity? Epidemiol Infect 2008; 136:1448–54. 279. Duttweiler L, Nadal D, Frey B. Pulmonary and systemic bacterial co- infections in severe RSV bronchiolitis. Arch Dis Child 2004; 89:1155–7. 280. Randolph AG, Reder L, Englund JA. Risk of bacterial infection in previously healthy respiratory syncytial virus-infected young children admitted to the intensive care unit. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2004;2 3 : 9 9 0 – 4 . 281. Kneyber MC, Blusse van Oud-Alblas H, van Vliet M, et al. Concurrent bacterial infection and prolonged mechanical ventilation in infants with respiratory syncytial virus lower respiratory tract disease. In- tensive Care Med 2005; 31:680–5. 282. Thorburn K, Harigopal S, Reddy V, et al. High incidence of pulmo- nary bacterial co-infection in children with severe respiratory syncy- tial virus (RSV) bronchiolitis. Thorax 2006; 61:611–5. 283. Chidi CC, Mendelsohn HJ. Lung abscess. A study of the results of treatment based on 90 consecutive cases. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1974; 68:168–72. 284. Estrera AS, Platt MR, Mills LJ, et al. Primary lung abscess. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1980; 79:275–82. 285. Ball WS Jr., Bisset GS 3rd, Towbin RB. Percutaneous drainage of chest abscesses in children. Radiology 1989; 171:431–4. 286. Hoffer FA, Bloom DA, Colin AA, et al. Lung abscess versus necro- tizing pneumonia: implications for interventional therapy. Pediatr Radiol 1999; 29:87–91. 287. Lorenzo RL, Bradford BF, Black J, et al. Lung abscesses in children: diagnostic and therapeutic needle aspiration. Radiology 1985; 157:79–80. 288. Patradoon-Ho P, Fitzgerald DA. Lung abscess in children. Paediatr Respir Rev 2007; 8:77–84. 289. Halm EA, Fine MJ, Marrie TJ, et al. Time to clinical stability in pa- tients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia: implica- tions for practice guidelines. JAMA 1998; 279:1452–7. 290. Wexler ID, Knoll S, Picard E, et al. Clinical characteristics and out- come of complicated pneumococcal pneumonia in a pediatric pop- ulation. Pediatr Pulmonol 2006; 41:726–34. 291. Lynch T, Platt R, Gouin S, et al. Can we predict which children with clinically suspected pneumonia will have the presence of focal in- filtrates on chest radiographs? Pediatrics 2004; 113:e186–9. 292. American Academy of Pediatrics Subcommittee on Diagnosis and Management of Bronchiolitis. Diagnosis and management of bron- chiolitis. Pediatrics 2006; 118:1774–93. 293. Mennella JA, Beauchamp GK. Optimizing oral medications for chil- dren. Clin Ther 2008; 30:2120–32. 294. Cohen R, de La Rocque F, Lecuyer A, et al. Study of the acceptability of antibiotic syrups, suspensions, and oral solutions prescribed to pediatric outpatients. Eur J Pediatr 2009; 168:851–7. 295. Ramgoolam A, Steele R. Formulations of antibiotics for children in primary care: effects on compliance and efficacy. Paediatr Drugs 2002; 4:323–33. 296. Kobr J, Pizingerova K, Sasek L, et al. Treatment of encapsulated pleural effusions in children: a prospective trial. Pediatr Int 2010; 52:453–8. 297. Bender BG, Bender SE. Patient-identified barriers to asthma treat- ment adherence: responses to interviews, focus groups, and ques- tionnaires. Immunol Allergy Clin North Am 2005; 25:107–30. 298. Snodgrass SR, Vedanarayanan VV, Parker CC, et al. Pediatric patients with undetectable anticonvulsant blood levels: comparison with compliant patients. J Child Neurol 2001; 16:164–8. 299. Bradley JS, Ching DK, Phillips SE. Outpatient therapy of serious pe- diatric infections with ceftriaxone. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1988; 7:160–4. 300. Ruebner R, Keren R, Coffin S, et al. Complications of central venous catheters used for the treatment of acute hematogenous osteomyelitis. Pediatrics 2006; 117:1210–5. 301. Peltola H, Unkila-Kallio L, Kallio MJ. Simplified treatment of acute staphylococcal osteomyelitis of childhood. The Finnish Study Group. Pediatrics 1997; 99:846–50. 302. Zaoutis T, Localio AR, Leckerman K, et al. Prolonged intravenous therapy versus early transition to oral antimicrobial therapy for acute osteomyelitis in children. Pediatrics 2009; 123:636–42. 303. Watt JP, Wolfson LJ, O’Brien KL, et al. Burden of disease caused by Haemophilus influenzae type b in children younger than 5 years: global estimates. Lancet 2009; 374:903–11. 304. O’Brien KL, Wolfson LJ, Watt JP, et al. Burden of disease caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae in children younger than 5 years: global estimates. Lancet 2009; 374:893–902. 305. World pneumonia day: November 2, 2009. MMWR 2009; 58:1184. 306. Whitney CG, Farley MM, Hadler J, et al. Decline in invasive pneu- mococcal disease after the introduction of protein-polysaccharide conjugate vaccine. N Engl J Med 2003; 348:1737–46. 307. Adams WG, Deaver KA, Cochi SL, et al. Decline of childhood Hae- mophilus influenzae type b (Hib) disease in the Hib vaccine era. JAMA 1993; 269:221–6. 308. Pilishvili T, Lexau C, Farley MM, et al. Sustained reductions in in- vasive pneumococcal disease in the era of conjugate vaccine. J Infect Dis 2010; 201:32–41. 309. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. ACIP provisional recommendations for use of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vac- cien (PCV13) among infants and children. Available at: http:// www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/wk/mm5909.pdf. Accessed 14 August 2011. 310. Bender JM, Ampofo K, Korgenski K, et al. Pneumococcal necrotizing pneumonia in Utah: does serotype matter? Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46:1346–52. 311. Hortal M, Sehabiague G, Camou T, et al. Pneumococcal pneumonia in hospitalized Uruguayan children and potential prevention with different vaccine formulations. J Pediatr 2008; 152:850–3. 312. Tan TQ, Mason EO Jr., Wald ER, et al. Clinical characteristics of children with complicated pneumonia caused by Streptococcus pneu- moniae. Pediatrics 2002; 110:1–6. 313. Langley JM, Kellner JD, Solomon N, et al. Empyema associated with community-acquired pneumonia: a Pediatric Investigator’s Collabo- rative Network on Infections in Canada (PICNIC) study. BMC Infect Dis 2008; 8:129. 314. Ramphul N, Eastham KM, Freeman R, et al. Cavitatory lung disease complicating empyema in children. Pediatr Pulmonol 2006;4 1 : 750–3. 315. Eastham KM, Freeman R, Kearns AM, et al. Clinical features, aetiol- ogy and outcome of empyema in children in the north east of Eng- land. Thorax 2004; 59:522–5. 316. Eltringham G, Kearns A, Freeman R, et al. Culture-negative childhood empyema is usually due to penicillin-sensitive Streptococcus pneu- moniae capsular serotype 1. J Clin Microbiol 2003; 41:521–2. 317. Neuzil KM, Mellen BG, Wright PF, et al. The effect of influenza on hospitalizations, outpatient visits, and courses of antibiotics in chil- dren. N Engl J Med 2000; 342:225–31. 318. Ampofo K, Gesteland PH, Bender J, et al. Epidemiology, complica- tions, and cost of hospitalization in children with laboratory- confirmed influenza infection. Pediatrics 2006; 118:2409–17. 319. Izurieta HS, Thompson WW, Kramarz P, et al. Influenza and the rates of hospitalization for respiratory disease among infants and young children. N Engl J Med 2000; 342:232–9. 320. Poehling KA, Edwards KM, Weinberg GA, et al. The underrecog- nized burden of influenza in young children. N Engl J Med 2006; 355:31–40. 321. Joshi AY, Iyer VN, St Sauver JL, et al. Effectiveness of inactivated influenza vaccine in children less than 5 years of age over multiple influenza seasons: a case-control study. Vaccine 2009; 27:4457–61. 322. Belshe RB, Edwards KM, Vesikari T, et al. Live attenuated versus inactivated influenza vaccine in infants and young children. N Engl J Med 2007; 356:685–96. 323. O’Brien KL, Walters MI, Sellman J, et al. Severe pneumococcal pneumonia in previously healthy children: the role of preceding in- fluenza infection. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 30:784–9. 324. Finelli L, Fiore A, Dhara R, et al. Influenza-associated pediatric mortality in the United States: increase of Staphylococcus aureus coinfection. Pediatrics. 2008 Oct; 122(4):805–11. 325. Chien YW, Klugman KP, Morens DM. Bacterial pathogens and death during the 1918 influenza pandemic. N Engl J Med 2009; 361:2582–3. 326. Klugman KP, Chien YW, Madhi SA. Pneumococcal pneumonia and influenza: a deadly combination. Vaccine 2009; 27(Suppl 3):C9–C14. 327. Klugman KP, Astley CM, Lipsitch M. Time from illness onset to death, 1918 influenza and pneumococcal pneumonia. Emerg Infect Dis 2009; 15:346–7. 328. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. ACIP provisional recom- mendations for the use of influenza vaccines. 2010. Available at: http:// www.cdc.gov/mmwr/pdf/rr/rr59e0729.pdf. Accessed 14 August 2011. 329. Hall CB, Weinberg GA, Iwane MK, et al. The burden of respiratory syncytial virus infection in young children. N Engl J Med 2009; 360:588–98. 330. Meissner HC, Bocchini JA Jr, Brady MT, et al. The role of im- munoprophylaxis in the reduction of disease attributable to re- spiratory syncytial virus. Pediatrics 2009; 124:1676–9. 331. Dowell SF, Kupronis BA, Zell ER, et al. Mortality from pneumonia in children in the United States, 1939 through 1996. N Engl J Med 2000; 342:1399–407. 332. Weiss AK, Hall M, Lee GE, et al. Adjunct corticosteroids in children hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia. Pediatrics 2011; 127:e255–63. 333. Gorton CP, Jones JL. Wide geographic variation between Pennsyl- vania counties in the population rates of hospital admissions for pneumonia among children with and without comorbid chronic conditions. Pediatrics 2006; 117:176–80. 334. Lieu TA, Ray GT, Black SB, et al. Projected cost-effectiveness of pneumococcal conjugate vaccination of healthy infants and young children. JAMA 2000; 283:1460–8. 335. Paladino JA, Adelman MH, Schentag JJ, et al. Direct costs in patients hospitalised with community-acquired pneumonia after non- response to outpatient treatment with macrolide antibacterials in the US. Pharmacoeconomics 2007; 25:677–83. 336. Shoham Y, Dagan R, Givon-Lavi N, et al. Community-acquired pneumonia in children: quantifying the burden on patients and their families including decrease in quality of life. Pediatrics 2005; 115:1213–9. 337. Kohn GL, Walston C, Feldstein J, et al. Persistent abnormal lung function after childhood empyema. Am J Respir Med 2002; 1:441–5. 338. McLaughlin FJ, Goldmann DA, Rosenbaum DM, et al. Empyema in children: clinical course and long-term follow-up. Pediatrics 1984; 73:587–93. 339. Redding GJ, Walund L, Walund D, et al. Lung function in children following empyema. Am J Dis Child 1990; 144:1337–42. 340. Satish B, Bunker M, Seddon P. Management of thoracic empyema in childhood: does the pleural thickening matter? Arch Dis Child 2003; 88:918–21.