Cited by 38Breast Lesions and CarcinomasBreastfeeding Practices and InfluencesBreast Implant and Reconstruction

Breast abscesses in lactating women: evidences for ultrasound-guided percutaneous drainage to avoid surgery

Colin, Catherine, Delov, Ana Gjorgjievska, Peyron-Faure, Noémie, Rabilloud, Muriel, Charlot, Mathilde·2019·Emergency Radiology

Abstract

Background Surgical incision with drainage remains the first-line therapy recommendation for breast abscesses greater than 5 cm. Purpose To determine recovery with ultrasound guided (US-guided) procedures for treatment of lactational breast abscesses without surgical incision for drainage. Material and methods Institutional review board approval and written informed patient consent were obtained for this retrospective study. From May 1, 2009, to June 1, 2018, 92 consecutive women (mean age 30 years, range 18-45) with 105 abscesses were treated with oral antibiotics and US-guided percutaneous drainage under local anesthesia. A total number of 202 US-guided procedures were performed. Three techniques were used: needle aspiration (diameter 18 to 14G), pigtail catheter insertion (diameter 5 to 7F), and/or vacuum-assisted biopsy/aspiration (diameter 10G). When using needle aspiration or pigtail catheter, a saline irrigation of the cavity was performed according to pus viscosity. Results The median diameter of abscesses was 4.5 cm (range 1-15), 82/105 (78%) were larger than 3 cm and 40/105 (38%) larger than 5 cm. US-guided management was successful for 101/105 (96%; 95% CI, (91-99%)) abscesses regardless the size. After the first round of procedures, 49/105 (47%) abscesses were recovered, 56/105 (53%) needed more than one drainage with a median number drainages of 2.6 (2-6). In 4/105 cases (4%), women underwent additional surgery under general anesthesia. By excluding abscesses whi…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10140-019-01694-z

Cites

2 of 2 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

Authors
Colin, C., Delov, A. G., Peyron-Faure, N., Rabilloud, M., & Charlot, M.
Affiliations
  • Hôpital Femme Mère Enfant (FR)
  • Clinique Charcot (FR)
  • Lyon 1 Université (FR)
  • Hospices Civils de Lyon (FR)
Corresponding author
Colin, Catherine
Venue
Emergency Radiology
Published
2019-06-01
Volume
26
Issue
5
Pages
507-514
ISSN
  • 1070-3004 (ISSN-L)
  • 1438-1435
OpenAlex
W2946919803
Cited by
38
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 5
FWCI
3.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Emergency Radiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Breast Lesions and Carcinomas
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Breastfeeding Practices and Influences
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Breast Implant and Reconstruction
Keywords
ultrasound-guided percutaneous drainage, needle aspiration, pigtail catheter, vacuum-assisted biopsy, avoiding surgery, breastfeeding, abscess size, local anesthesia
MeSH terms
Abscess, Adolescent, Adult, Breast Diseases, Drainage, Female, Humans, Lactation, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Ultrasonography, Interventional

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