BioMed Research International

BioMed Research International / 2019 / Article

Research Article | Open Access

Volume 2019 |Article ID 4834396 |

Serges Tchatchouang, Ariane Nzouankeu, Sebastien Kenmoe, Laure Ngando, Veronique Penlap, Marie-Christine Fonkoua, Eric-Walter Pefura-Yone, Richard Njouom, "Bacterial Aetiologies of Lower Respiratory Tract Infections among Adults in Yaoundé, Cameroon", BioMed Research International, vol. 2019, Article ID 4834396, 7 pages, 2019.

Bacterial Aetiologies of Lower Respiratory Tract Infections among Adults in Yaoundé, Cameroon

Academic Editor: Roberto Cangemi
Received23 Jan 2019
Revised28 Mar 2019
Accepted11 Apr 2019
Published17 Apr 2019


Lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) remain a challenge in African healthcare settings and only few data are available on their aetiology in Cameroon. The purpose of this study was to access the bacterial cause of LRTIs in patients in Cameroon by two methods. Methods. Participants with LRTIs were enrolled in the referral centre for respiratory diseases in Yaoundé city and its surroundings. To detect bacteria, specimens were tested by conventional bacterial culture and a commercial reverse-transcriptase real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay. One hundred forty-one adult patients with LRTIs were enrolled in the study. Among the participants, 46.8% were positive for at least one bacterium. Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae were the most detected bacteria with 14.2% (20/141) followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae, 9.2% (13/141), Staphylococcus aureus, 7.1% (10/141), and Moraxella catarrhalis, 4.3% (6/141). Bacterial coinfection accounted for 23% (14/61) with Haemophilus influenzae being implicated in 19.7% (12/61). The diagnostic performance of RT-PCR for bacteria detection (43.3%) was significantly different from that of culture (17.7%) (p< 0.001). Only Streptococcus pneumoniae detection was associated with empyema by RT-PCR (p<0.001). These findings enhance understanding of bacterial aetiologies in order to improve respiratory infection management and treatment. It also highlights the need to implement molecular tools as part of the diagnosis of LRTIs.

1. Introduction

Lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) are major cause of morbidity and mortality globally [1]. In Africa, they are one of the most prevalent causes of death [2]. Particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, high case fatality ratios were reported in Somalia and Chad with 546.8 and 511.3 deaths per 100 000 inhabitants, respectively, when compared to the lowest mortality (0.65 deaths per 100 000 inhabitants) registered in Finland (Europe) [2]. LRTI is a broad terminology encompassing different clinical presentations and aetiologies, which may vary according to, for example, age and season among others [3]. Overall, viruses are responsible for a large proportion of LRTIs but antibiotics are often unnecessarily prescribed for their treatment without any laboratory testing [4, 5] and can contribute to the emergence of antimicrobial resistance [6]. Other causes of LRTIs are bacteria: Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Staphylococcus aureus being the most common [2, 7, 8].

However, studies on bacterial aetiologies of LRTIs in Cameroon are limited. In addition, the few studies performed in the 90’s used traditional culture methods [9, 10]. Although culture is still considered to be the gold standard, the method has important disadvantages, such as a longer time to result, the stringent specimen collection and transport condition and the risk of inhibited growth of the pathogens due to previous antibiotic treatment [11, 12]. As a consequence, many patients in African healthcare centres remain undiagnosed despite clinical evidence of LRTIs.

The development of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) has revolutionized clinical bacteriology [13]. They are promising alternative diagnostic methods. Compared to culture, they are able to provide results within a few hours, are sensitive, and do not require viable organisms [14, 15]. Using NAATs, the viral aetiology of respiratory infections in Cameroon has been largely documented [16, 17]; meanwhile bacterial aetiology on the other hand remains unexplored. Knowing the aetiology of LRTIs can help avoid unnecessary antibiotherapy in healthcare settings.

Our overall aim was to identify the respiratory bacteria of patients presenting with symptoms and clinical signs of LRTI at a referral centre for respiratory diseases in Yaoundé, Cameroon. Here we report on the bacteria that were detected using a commercial real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assay in addition to traditional culture methods.

2. Methodology

2.1. Study Design

We conducted a prospective study among patients presenting with symptoms and clinical signs of LRTI at the pneumology department of the Jamot Hospital in Yaoundé from mid-January 2017 to mid-January 2018. This hospital is the management centre for respiratory diseases of Yaoundé city and its surroundings. LTRIs were cases of bronchitis, bronchiolitis, and pneumonia diagnosed by the physician. Adult patients who presented at least two of the following symptoms were included in the study after written informed consent was obtained: fever, cough, dyspnoea, wheezing, chest pain, or sore throat. Any prior antimicrobial treatment taken by the patient was also recorded before microbiological investigations. Patients diagnosed with pulmonary tuberculosis or with infections other than LRTIs were excluded. Sociodemographic data and clinical signs were recorded before enrolment. Empiric antibiotic therapy was not administered to patients before laboratory investigation. To guide antibiotic selection in the follow-up of participants, drug susceptibility testing was done and provided to the physicians but is not presented here.

2.2. Ethics and Consent to Participate

The study was reviewed and approved by the participating hospital and the National Research Ethics Committee of Cameroon (N°2017/03/876/CE/CNERSH/SP). All participants and/or the parents/legal guardians of minors provided written informed consent before enrolment. In addition, assent was sought for participants below the age of 21 year, legal age of majority in Cameroon.

2.3. Sample Collection

Clinical samples consisted of bronchoalveolar lavages (BALs) and fluids drained from pleural effusion (FPEf) or pleural empyema (FPEm) depending on the clinical and radiological presentation of the patients. Empyema was considered as collection of pus in the pleural space with secondary inflammation of the visceral and parietal pleura [18]. The samples were transported at ambient temperature and within 1 hour after collection to Centre Pasteur of Cameroon (CPC) for diagnostic testing (microscopy, bacterial culture, and anatomopathology analysis for FPEf). Upon receipt at the CPC, the samples were divided into two aliquots. One aliquot was immediately used for bacterial culture; the other was stored in medium (universal transport medium) and kept at -80°C until molecular amplification.

2.4. Bacterial Culture

According to the French REMIC guidelines, a loopful (10 μL) of the sample (BAL and pleural fluids) was plated onto chocolate, 5% sheep blood agar (BA) media, and Cysteine-Lactose-Electrolyte-Deficient (CLED) plates. After inoculation, the agar plates were incubated at 37°C, with the chocolate and BA agar plates in a 5% CO2 atmosphere and the CLED agar in normal atmosphere, for 18 to 24 hours. For isolation of anaerobic bacteria, FPEm was inoculated onto 5% sheep blood agar plates and was incubated at 37°C for 18 to 72 hours using GENbag anaer (bioMérieux, Marcy l’Etoile, France) to generate anaerobic growth conditions.

For pleural fluids, all growth bacteria were considered as positive irrespective of number of colonies. For BAL, protected bronchoalveolar lavage was done to avoid contamination by the oropharyngeal commensal flora. BAL fluids were serially diluted (dilutions of 1:10, 1:100, and 1:1000) and bacterial growth was defined as significant when present as ≥ 104 colony forming units (cfu) per mL.

Isolated colonies were identified using Gram staining, common biochemical tests [19], and the Vitek Compact 2 system (bioMérieux, Marcy l’Etoile, France).

2.5. RNA Extraction

RNA was extracted from all samples using the QIAamp Viral RNA Mini kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany), following the manufacturer’s instructions. A final elution volume of 60 μL of RNA was stored in 1.5 mL Eppendorf tubes at –20°C until amplification.

2.6. Molecular Amplification

The RNAs were tested using the commercial RT-PCR assay Fast-track Diagnostics Respiratory pathogens (Fast-track Diagnostics, Junglinster, Luxembourg). This kit enabled targeting 10 bacteria: Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Chlamydophila pneumoniae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae type b, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Legionella pneumophila/longbeachae, Salmonella spp., Moraxella catarrhalis, Bordetella spp. (except Bordetella parapertussis), and Haemophilus influenzae. The manufacturer’s instructions were followed, briefly: a volume of 10 μL of RNA was added to 15 μL of fast tract master mix (buffer, primers, probes, and enzyme). Amplification was performed in an ABI PRISM 7500 RT-PCR machine (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA, USA). An internal control was added to all samples to ensure validity of the assay. Positive and negative controls were included in each experiment.

2.7. Statistical Analysis

Data were analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences software (version 22.0, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Distribution of categorical variables was compared using the chi-square or Fisher’s exact tests as appropriate. Independent t-test was done for mean comparison between groups. Results of bacterial detection by culture and RT-PCR were compared using the McNemar test. The significance level was set at 0.05.

3. Results

3.1. Study Population

Overall, a total of 141 patients were enrolled; the male/female sex ratio was 1.8. The patients’ age ranged from 18 to 94 years with a median age of 50 years (interquartile range: 34.7-62.1). No mean age difference was noticed among males and females (p= 0.786). The sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the patients are summarised in Table 1. The most predominant symptoms were cough (87.2%), dyspnoea (85.8%), breathlessness (83%), asthenia (75.9%), fever (63.8%), chest pain (60.3%), and myalgia (42.6%). Among the type of specimens collected, FPEf accounted for 47.1% (67/141), BAL for 28.4% (40/141), and FPEm for 24.1% (34/141). The majority of patients (76.6%) had already taken antimicrobials (beta-lactams, sulfonamides, aminoglycoside, macrolides, and quinolones) before the enrolment.

Study population Total (n=141)Positive bacterial culture (n=25)

 Median age in years (IQR)50 (34.7- 62.1)48 (32.9-62.8)
 18-35 years (young adults)37 (26.2)8 (32)
 36-55 years (middle-aged adults)56 (39.7)9 (36)
 >55 years (old adults)48 (34)8 (32)
 Males90 (63.8)16 (64)
 Females51 (36.2)9 (36)
Smoking habit30 (21.3)2 (8)
Duration of symptoms (days)45 (21-90)45 (37.5-67.7)
Clinical signs
 Cough123 (87.2)22 (88)
 Dyspnoea121 (85.8)22 (88)
 Breathlessness117 (83)20 (80)
 Asthenia107 (75.9)19 (76)
 Fever90 (63.8)16 (64)
 Chest pain85 (60.3)13 (52)
 Myalgia60 (42.6)5 (20)
 Arthralgia31 (22)5 (20)
  Headaches24 (17)1 (4)
 Sore throat14 (9.9)2 (8)
 Vomiting11 (7.8)2 (8)
 Diarrhea10 (7.1)0
 Rhinorrhea7 (5)1 (4)
 Conjunctivitis2 (1.4)0

Data are number and percentage in brackets; IQR: interquartile range; n: number.
3.2. Bacterial Detection

Bacteria were detected in 17.7% (25/141) and 43.3% (61/141) of the samples using traditional culture and RT-PCR, respectively (p<0.001). Combining both techniques, an aetiological bacterial agent was detected in 46.8% (66/141) of the samples. Both methods detected more frequently S. pneumoniae (14.2% by RT-PCR versus 5.7% by culture), H. influenzae (14.2% by RT-PCR versus 3.5% by culture), and K. pneumoniae (9.2% by RT-PCR versus 3.5% by culture).

As the BALs were sampled aseptically, we obtained 14 bacterial growths out of the 40 plated. One culture exhibited two bacterial species out of 14. The BAL cultures for which the less bacterial growth was noted had 104 cfu/mL. For pleural fluids, the bacterial growth ranged from 7 to more than 106 cfu/mL.

There was no association between clinical symptoms of inclusion and bacterial detection methods (p>0.05). There was an association between myalgia and bacterial culture (p= 0.014). There was no difference for bacterial detection among patients under antibiotics prior to the diagnosis and those who were not (p=0.757). Results according to sample type and method are presented in Table 2. S. pneumoniae was significantly more detected in FPEm (p<0.001) compared to the other sample types.

FPEf (n=67)BAL (n=40)FPEm (n=34)
Culture (%)RT-PCR (%)Culture (%)RT-PCR (%)Culture (%)RT-PCR (%)


Streptococcus pneumoniae1 (1.5)3 (7.1)2 (5)4 (10)5 (14.7)13 (38.2)
Haemophilus influenzae07 (11.4)4 (10)9 (22.5)1 (2.9)4 (11.7)
Klebsiella pneumoniae1 (1.5)4 (5.7)4 (10)4 (10)05 (14.7)
Moraxella catarrhalis0004 (10)02 (5.9)
Staphylococcus aureus03 (4.3)03 (7.5)1 (2.9)4 (11.7)
Streptococcus anginosus0/0/1 (2.9)/
Streptococcus constellatus0/0/1 (2.9)/
Enterobacter agglomerans0/1 (2.5)/0/
Pseudomonas aeruginosa0/2 (5)/0/
Citrobacter koseri0/1 (2.5)/0/
Legionella species/0/3 (7.5)/3 (8.9)

Total2 (3)17 (25.4)14 (35)27 (67.5)9 (26.5)31 (91.1)

BAL: bronchoalveolar lavage; RT-PCR: reverse-transcriptase real-time polymerase chain reaction; FPEf: fluid drained from pleural effusion; FPEm: fluid drained from pleural empyema.
3.3. Coinfections

Multiple bacteria or bacterial coinfections were detected in a total of 14/61 (23%) specimens using RT-PCR. Only one case of coinfection was reported with culture: Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Citrobacter koseri (4%; 1/25) in BAL. Table 3 shows the different coinfections obtained according to the clinical sample.

Infection levelPathogensNumberClinical samples

Double bacterial infectionHaemophilus influenzae + Legionella species1FPEm
Haemophilus influenzae + Streptococcus pneumoniae32 BAL + 1 FPEm
Streptococcus pneumoniae +Klebsiella pneumoniae2FPEm
Haemophilus influenzae + Staphylococcus aureus3FPEf, 2 BAL
Haemophilus influenzae +Klebsiella pneumoniae2BAL+ FPEf
Triple bacterial infectionHaemophilus influenzae + Staphylococcus aureus +Klebsiella pneumoniae1FPEm
Haemophilus influenzae + Legionella species + Klebsiella pneumonia1BAL
Haemophilus influenzae + Legionella species + Moraxella catarrhalis1FPEm

RT-PCR: reverse-transcriptase real-time polymerase chain reaction; BAL: bronchoalveolar lavage; FPEf: fluid drained from pleural effusion; FPEm: fluid drained from pleural empyema.

4. Discussion

The diagnosis and management of respiratory tract infections are great challenges in Africa due to the socioeconomic burden and limited access to good healthcare and hospitals. In order to formulate adequate guideline for the management of LRTIs, including diagnosis and treatment, data on the aetiology of the LRTIs should be obtained. This study focused on establishing the bacterial aetiology of LRTIs following diagnostic tools and type of clinical samples. One hundred and forty-one clinical samples from patients presenting symptoms of LRTIs were subjected to bacterial investigations using traditional culture and RT-PCR.

At least one bacterium could be detected in 46.8% of the 141 patients clinically diagnosed with LRTIs. This prevalence is similar to 45.2% found in Enugu State, Nigeria [20], but higher than the 24% reported in Tunisia [21]. Using the same diagnostic approach, prevalence of 77% and 85.7% was reported in Gambia and in Osun State, Nigeria, respectively [22, 23]. The prevalence rates may be explained by the differences in study designs and geographic areas. Indeed, the spread of respiratory infections varies between populations and countries, depending on difference in geography, climate, and socioeconomic conditions [2427]. In addition, we reported the bacterial aetiology of LRTIs in adults, whereas most studies included only children. The lower prevalence rate compared to Gambia and Nigeria might also be explained by the high percentage (76.6%) of patients who used antibiotics before enrolment.

S. pneumoniae was the leading pathogen of LRTIs followed by H. influenzae and K. pneumoniae. S. pneumoniae was also found to be the main cause of LRTIs in a study in Malawi [28] and Tunisia [21]. However, other studies in Nigeria, which is a neighboring country of Cameroon, reported K. pneumoniae as the most detected pathogen [8, 20] in LRTIs or S. aureus in Tunisia [29]. S. pneumoniae remains an important pathogen in LRTIs even with the introduction of 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine [30]. This suggests that further investigations are needed for vaccine impact. Conversely, no H. influenzae type b was observed. Although S. pneumoniae, H. influenzae, and K. pneumoniae were the key bacteria, there was a remarkable variation in distribution of these etiologic agents between clinical samples.

We observed an association between bacterial detection and type of clinical sample. The bacterial detection rate was the lowest in FPEf compared to the other clinical samples. The frequency of bacterial detection in FPEf (3% by culture) was as low as the one observed in Spain, where 7% (14/191) of fluids from uncomplicated parapneumonic pleural effusions were culture-positive [31]. The low detection level could be due to the fact that 80.6% of FPEf were from patients undergoing an antimicrobial treatment.

In FPEm, the bacterial detection rate by culture (26.5%) was low compared to previous results obtained in the Jamot Hospital (Yaoundé, Cameroon) 8 years ago, where the bacterial detection rate was 53.7% [32] and also compared to a study in Lleida Spain, reporting a culture positivity rate of 66% [31]. But our bacterial detection rate in FPEm was higher compared to the one obtained in San Sebastian, Spain, where only 10% of bacteria-positive FPEm was detected by culture between January 2005 and December 2012 [33]. Also in the study performed in San Sebastian, the use of antibiotics prior to bacteriological investigations was high (81.7%). However, the study performed in Lleida did not report on the prior use of antibiotics. Most bacterial detections were in FPEm and we hypothesize that this could be due to the nutrient-rich medium of FPEm supporting the growth of pathogenic bacteria such as S. pneumoniae strains. This may be one of the reasons why pneumococci are a common bacterial cause of empyema. Thus, the high density and persistent growth of S. pneumoniae in pleural fluid highlight the importance of draining infected effusions [34].

We found H. influenzae to be the key pathogen in BAL, which is different from what has been observed in lung aspirates of Malawian and Gambian children with S. pneumoniae [22, 35]. Our result in BAL is also different from the ones in Korean adults with methicillin-resistant S. aureus [36] as the most frequently isolated bacterium. Overall, bacterial profiles from BAL vary among studies [37].

The RT-PCR increased the yield of bacteria detection by 25.5%. As previously reported [33], the use of molecular tool has greatly improved microbial diagnosis of LRTIs. In the present study, only 25 positive cultures were obtained among the 141 patients. Concordant with a recent study conducted in Sweden [38], using the RT-PCR, we were able to detect the noncultivable and fastidious pathogen Legionella species which is overlooked by routine standard culture. Rapid detection of uncommon pathogens from LRTI samples by molecular tool might be important in the clinical routine. Almost all coinfections were detected using RT-PCR. Bacterial coinfection rate was near to the 18.9% of inpatients with nonresponding community-acquired pneumonia in Belgium [39]. This finding suggests that molecular assay is the most useful method to detect coinfections representing near-past and current infections.

Limitations. Antibiotic treatment prior to the diagnosis and delay of patients could be biases for real pathogen frequencies reported in this study.

5. Conclusion

Bacterial aetiology was more reported in cases of LRTI with empyema. S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae were the most commonly detected bacteria. The molecular tool used during investigation detected significantly more bacteria than traditional culture and may be an additional helpful tool for diagnosis of LRTIs. Nevertheless, control of antibiotic use and early diagnosis are crucial when managing LRTIs.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.


This work was supported by the United States Department of Health and Human Services [Grant no. 6 DESP060001-01- via the International Network of Pasteur Institutes. The authors’ gratitude goes towards participants. They appreciate the collaboration of the Yaoundé Jamot Hospital staff.


  1. C. J. L. Murray and A. D. Lopez, “Measuring the global burden of disease,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 369, no. 5, pp. 448–457, 2013. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  2. “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,” The Lancet Infectious Diseases, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 1133–1161, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  3. S. Khan, P. Singh, M. Ansari, and K. Gurung, “Bacteria etiological agents causing lower respiratory tract infections in the western part of Nepal,” Ibnosina Journal of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 3–8, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  4. L. Ren, Z. Xiang, L. Guo, and J. Wang, “Viral infections of the lower respiratory tract,” Current Infectious Disease Reports, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 284–291, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  5. A. T. Pavia, “Viral infections of the lower respiratory tract: Old viruses, new viruses, and the role of diagnosis,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. S284–S289, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  6. A. S. Ouedraogo, H. Jean Pierre, A. L. Bañuls, R. Ouédraogo, and S. Godreuil, “Emergence and spread of antibiotic resistance in West Africa: contributing factors and threat assessment,” Medecine et Sante Tropicales, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 147–154, 2017. View at: Google Scholar
  7. M. Uzoamaka, O. Ngozi, O. S. Johnbull, and O. Martin, “Bacterial etiology of lower respiratory tract infections and their antimicrobial susceptibility,” The American Journal of the Medical Sciences, vol. 354, no. 5, p. 471, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  8. C. A. Egbe, C. Ndiokwere, and R. Omoregie, “Microbiology of lower respiratory tract infections in Benin city, Nigeria,” Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 27–31, 2011. View at: Google Scholar
  9. S. Koulla-Shiro, C. Kuaban, and L. Belec, “Acute community-acquired bacterial pneumonia in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infected and non-HIV-infected adult patients in Cameroon: Aetiology and outcome,” Tubercle and Lung Disease, vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 47–51, 1996. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  10. S. Koulla-Shiro, C. Kuaban, and L. Bélec, “Microbial etiology of acute community-acquired pneumonia in adult hospitalized patients in Yaounde-Cameroon,” Clinical Microbiology and Infection, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 180–186, 1997. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  11. D. J. Cook, J. M. Fitzgerald, G. H. Guyatt, and S. Walter, “Evaluation of the protected brush catheter and bronchoalveolar lavage in the diagnosis of nosocomial pneumonia,” Journal of Intensive Care Medicine, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 196–205, 1991. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  12. “Guidelines for the management of adults with hospital-acquired, ventilator-associated, and healthcare-associated pneumonia,” American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, vol. 171, no. 4, pp. 388–416, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  13. K. B. Laupland and L. Valiquette, “The changing culture of the microbiology laboratory,” The Canadian Journal of Infectious Diseases & Medical Microbiology, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 125–128, 2013. View at: Google Scholar
  14. A. Endimiani, K. M. Hujer, A. M. Hujer et al., “Are we ready for novel detection methods to treat respiratory pathogens in hospital-acquired pneumonia?” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 52, supplement 4, pp. S373–S383, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  15. M. Lung and G. Codina, “Molecular diagnosis in HAP/VAP,” Current Opinion in Critical Care, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 487–494, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  16. S. Kenmoe, P. Tchendjou, M.-A. Vernet et al., “Viral etiology of severe acute respiratory infections in hospitalized children in Cameroon, 2011–2013,” Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 386–393, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  17. R. Njouom, E. L. Yekwa, P. Cappy, A. Vabret, P. Boisier, and D. Rousset, “Viral etiology of influenza-like illnesses in Cameroon, January-December 2009,” The Journal of Infectious Diseases, vol. 206, supplement 1, pp. S29–S35, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  18. M. Ried, J. Graml, C. Groer, H.-S. Hofmann, and Z. Sziklavari, “Para- and postpneumonic pleural empyema: current treatment strategies in children and adults,” Zentralblatt fur Chirurgie, vol. 140, Supplement 1, pp. S22–S28, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  19. W. C. Winn, S. D. Allen, A. Stephen et al., Koneman's Color Atlas and Textbook of Diagnostic Microbiology, 6th edition, 2006.
  20. M. Uzoamaka, O. Ngozi, O. S. Johnbull, and O. Martin, “Bacterial etiology of lower respiratory tract infections and their antimicrobial susceptibility,” The American Journal of the Medical Sciences, vol. 354, no. 5, pp. 471–475, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  21. M. Fekih Hassen, A. Ben Haj Khalifa, N. Tilouche et al., “Severe community-acquired pneumonia admitted at the intensive care unit: Main clinical and bacteriological features and prognostic factors: A Tunisian experience,” Revue de Pneumologie Clinique, vol. 70, no. 5, pp. 253–259, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  22. S. R. C. Howie, G. A. J. Morris, R. Tokarz et al., “Etiology of severe childhood pneumonia in the Gambia, West Africa, determined by conventional and molecular microbiological analyses of lung and pleural aspirate samples,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 682–685, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  23. B. P. Kuti and O. A. Oyelami, “Risk factors for parapneumonic effusions among children admitted with communityacquired pneumonia at a tertiary hospital in south-west Nigeria,” African Journal of Respiratory Medicine, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 26–34, 2014. View at: Google Scholar
  24. T. B. Kwofie, Y. A. Anane, B. Nkrumah, A. Annan, S. B. Nguah, and M. Owusu, “Respiratory viruses in children hospitalized for acute lower respiratory tract infection in Ghana,” Virology Journal, vol. 9, article no. 78, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  25. X. Huo, Y. Qin, X. Qi et al., “Surveillance of 16 respiratory viruses in patients with influenza-like illness in Nanjing, China,” Journal of Medical Virology, vol. 84, no. 12, pp. 1980–1984, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  26. J. del Valle Mendoza, A. Cornejo-Tapia, P. Weilg et al., “Incidence of respiratory viruses in peruvian children with acute respiratory infections,” Journal of Medical Virology, vol. 87, no. 6, pp. 917–924, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  27. B. Cui, D. Zhang, H. Pan et al., “Viral aetiology of acute respiratory infections among children and associated meteorological factors in southern China,” BMC Infectious Diseases, vol. 15, p. 124, 2015. View at: Google Scholar
  28. T. K. Hartung, D. Chimbayo, J. J. G. van Oosterhout et al., “Etiology of suspected pneumonia in adults admitted to a high-dependency unit in Blantyre, Malawi,” The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, vol. 85, no. 1, pp. 105–112, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  29. S. Hamouda, K. Chraiet, F. Khalsi et al., “Community-acquired pleuropneumonia in children: Bacteriological and therapeutic challenges,” La Tunisie Médicale, vol. 94, no. 4, pp. 290–297, 2016. View at: Google Scholar
  30. L. F. Pittet and K. Posfay-Barbe, “Pneumococcal vaccines for children: A global public health priority,” Clinical Microbiology and Infection, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 25–36, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  31. J. M. Porcel, A. Esquerda, M. Vives, and S. Bielsa, “Etiology of Pleural Effusions: Analysis of More than 3,000 Consecutive Thoracenteses,” Archivos de Bronconeumología, vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 161–165, 2014. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  32. E. W. Yone Pefura, C. Kuaban, S. Leonie, and E. Afane Ze, “Nontuberculous purulent pleural effusion in adults in Yaounde, Cameroon,” Medecine et Sante Tropicales, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 35–39, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  33. J. M. Marimón, M. Morales, G. Cilla, D. Vicente, and E. Pérez-Trallero, “Detection of bacteria and viruses in the pleural effusion of children and adults with community-acquired pneumonia,” Future Microbiology, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 909–915, 2015. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  34. N. D. Popowicz, S. M. Lansley, H. M. Cheah et al., “Human pleural fluid is a potent growth medium for Streptococcus pneumoniae,” PLoS ONE, vol. 12, no. 11, Article ID e0188833, 2017. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  35. E. D. Carrol, L. A. Mankhambo, M. Guiver et al., “PCR improves diagnostic yield from lung aspiration in malawian children with radiologically confirmed pneumonia,” PLoS ONE, vol. 6, no. 6, Article ID e21042, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  36. E. S. Kim, E.-C. Kim, S.-M. Lee et al., “Bacterial yield from quantitative cultures of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid in patients with pneumonia on antimicrobial therapy,” Korean Journal of Internal Medicine, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 156–162, 2012. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  37. M. El-Shabrawy and R. H. EL-Sokkary, “Role of fiberoptic bronchoscopy and BAL in assessment of the patients with non-responding pneumonia,” Egyptian Journal of Chest Diseases and Tuberculosis, vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 613–620, 2016. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
  38. M. Ullberg, P. Lüthje, P. Mölling, K. Strålin, and V. Özenci, “Broad-range detection of microorganisms directly from bronchoalveolar lavage specimens by PCR/electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry,” PLoS ONE, vol. 12, no. 1, Article ID e0170033, 2017. View at: Google Scholar
  39. I. De Schutter, E. De Wachter, F. Crokaert et al., “Microbiology of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid in children with acute nonresponding or recurrent community-acquired pneumonia: Identification of nontypeable haemophilus influenzae as a major pathogen,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 52, no. 12, pp. 1437–1444, 2011. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright © 2019 Serges Tchatchouang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

More related articles

 PDF Download Citation Citation
 Download other formatsMore
 Order printed copiesOrder

Related articles

Article of the Year Award: Outstanding research contributions of 2020, as selected by our Chief Editors. Read the winning articles.