Cited by 102Antimicrobial Resistance in StaphylococcusBreast Lesions and CarcinomasOtolaryngology and Infectious Diseases

Breast Abscess Bacteriologic Features in the Era of Community-Acquired Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Epidemics

Moazzez, Ashkan·2007·Archives of Surgery

Abstract

Hypothesis Increasing rates of community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections have also affected the microbial profile of breast abscesses. Objective To update the decade-old bacteriologic description of breast abscesses to improve the choice of initial antibacterial drug therapy. Design Retrospective case series. Setting County hospital emergency department. Patients Forty-four women (mean age, 41 years; age range, 20-63 years) with breast abscesses. Methods All cultures from the breast abscesses of patients were reviewed. Main outcome measures The microbiologic features and sensitivities of breast abscesses. Results Of 46 specimens only 28 showed bacterial yield (61%). Of these, 11 (39%) were polymicrobial, for an average of 1.4 isolates per specimen. The most common organism was S aureus, present in 12 of 37 aerobic cultures (32%), with MRSA in 7 (58%). The remaining organisms included coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (16%), diphtheroids (16%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (8%), Proteus mirabilis (5%), and other isolates (22%). All MRSA was sensitive to clindamycin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and linezolid. Only 2 patients (29%) were sensitive to levofloxacin. Two anaerobic cultures were positive for Propionibacterium acnes and Peptostreptococcus anaerobius. Conclusions Staphylococcus aureus is the most common pathogenic organism in modern breast abscesses. Many breast abscesses have community-acquired MRSA, with more than 50% of all S aure…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archsurg.142.9.881

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Moazzez, A.
Affiliations
University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author
Moazzez, Ashkan
Venue
Archives of Surgery
Published
2007-09-01
Volume
142
Issue
9
Pages
881
ISSN
  • 0004-0010 (ISSN-L)
  • 0272-5533
OpenAlex
W2076195857
Cited by
102
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
4.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Archives of Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Breast Lesions and Carcinomas
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Otolaryngology and Infectious Diseases
Keywords
breast abscess, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, community-acquired MRSA, co-infection, Staphylococcus aureus, coagulase-negative staphylococci, antibiotic susceptibility, empirical antibiotic therapy, Propionibacterium acnes, Peptostreptococcus anaerobius, soft tissue infection
MeSH terms
Abscess, Adult, Anti-Bacterial Agents, Female, Humans, Mastitis, Microbial Sensitivity Tests, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Staphylococcal Infections, Staphylococcus aureus, Methicillin Resistance, Community-Acquired Infections

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review