Skip to main content
Iranian Journal of Microbiology logoLink to Iranian Journal of Microbiology
. 2018 Dec;10(6):348–353.

“Is our choice of empirical antibiotics appropriate for patients with methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus in breast abscess?”

Nazia Lodhi 1,*, Nadeem Khurshaidi 1, Rufina Soomro 1, Maria Saleem 1, Syed Sheeraz ur Rahman 1, Sana Anwar 1
PMCID: PMC6414740  PMID: 30873261

Abstract

Background and Objectives:

Breast abscesses remain as one of the most common reasons for females to come for a surgical consult. This retrospective cohort study includes both lactating and non-lactating females with breast abscesses. Due to changing trends in bacteriology of organisms, we need to reconsider our empirical choices of antibiotics. In our study, the main causative organism in breast abscess was Staphylococcus aureus with predominant species being MRSA.

Materials and Methods:

This is an analytical review of all breast abscesses treated in a single center from 2012 to 2015. This study included bacterial cultures, antibiotic sensitivities and resistance pattern in breast abscesses.

Results:

268 patients were included in the study. 143 (53.4%) were Lactational abscesses and 125 (46.6%) were non-Lactational abscesses. 169 (63.0%) harbored S. aureus in which 86 (50.8%) were MRSA. MRSA was the predominant organism in the Lactational group while non-Lactational group had no growth or other organisms in culture in this study. Other growing organisms were Klebsiella pneumoniae, Bacteroides, Pseudomonas, Streptococcus species and Mycobacterium tuberculosis. On comparative analysis, MRSA showed statistically a significant difference with p<0.0001, when it comes to predominant growth in lactating mothers. First line prescribed empirical antibiotics received by the patient, which is amoxicillin clavulanate, is mostly resistant. It is recommended that the institutional antibiogram targeted treatment be offered to patients with breast abscess. We also recommend ciprofloxacin with clindamycin as initial empirical therapy.

Conclusion:

MRSA was the most common organism seen in breast abscesses. Our first line treatment of antibiotics was resistant. Clindamycin and ciprofloxacin should be the preferred 1st choice for treatment.

Keywords: Breast abscess, Empirical antibiotics, Staphylococcus aureus

INTRODUCTION

Mastitis is breast inflammation. Mastitis can become an abscess if not treated in a timely manner (15). Abscesses mostly occur in lactating females but can occur in non-lactating females and in all age groups. During the lactation period, incidence of mastitis is between 2% to 33% and there is 4.6% to 11% incidence of abscess formation in infected mastitis (69). Nipple cracks and stasis of milk due to pain are the main risk factor for abscess formation in lactating females (1014). In non-lactating females, diabetes, obesity, smoking tobacco and black people are the main risk factors (15, 16). Staphylococcus aureus is the main predominant organism isolated in breast abscesses (10, 1721). Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection is on the rise.

Moazzez et al. showed that 50% of cases harbor staphylococcal species in culture and 19% of all isolates from community-acquired breast abscesses were MRSA. Community acquired methicillin-resistant S. aureus (CA-MRSA) were mostly seen among females who lack traditional risk factors like in post-partum periods (2224). MRSA is more common in hospital environments and in patients with indwelling medical devices and is not frequently seen in community-acquired infections. Mastitis responds poorly to routine beta-lactams and progresses to abscess formation due to delay in appropriate antibiotics. This leads to serious morbidity and interferes with continued breast feeding (5, 6, 2528). At present, there is dearth of local literature on relationship of rising incidence of MRSA in females with breast abscesses and also on the choice of suitable antibiotics according to sensitivity. Hence, the purpose of this study was to determine the frequency of MRSA in females with breast abscesses as means to assess choice of empirical antibiotics for such a cohort.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was approval by the ethics committee. Sample size was obtained from the Breast Unit of Department of General Surgery, Liaquat National Hospital in July 2016. Medical records were reviewed and data collected on a predesigned Performa for a period Jan 2012 to Dec 2015. Data included patient's age, lactational status, culture and sensitivity of the drained pus and antibiotics given. All female patients who presented with the diagnosis of breast abscess were included in this study irrespective of age and lactational status. All patients with other benign pathologies and breast cancer were excluded from the study to avoid bias. Different types of organisms were isolated in cultures but in this study we focused on patients who had MRSA in culture. Data analysis was done by SSPS version 22. Descriptive analysis of quantitative variables was done. Age is presented as median. The categorical data is presented in numbers and frequencies; for example patient lactation status & organism isolates along with their culture and sensitivities.

Patient lactational status with relation to frequent organism and sensitivity of antibiotics were determined. For inferential statistics, chi square was used as a test of significance with the p value of <0.05 as significant.

RESULTS

A total of 268 patient's data who met the inclusion criteria in period from January 2012 to December 2015 were collected from records in Liaquat national hospital. All female patients (n= 268) met the inclusion criteria in which n=143 were lactating and n=125 were non-lactating. The age ranged from 11 to 60 years. The overall median age was 27 years. In lactating patients median age was 32 and in non-lactating patients median age was 30.

In 268 patients, 243 had unilateral breast abscesses, 6 had bilateral abscesses and 19 had axillary abscesses. In 143 lactating patients 140 were breast abscess and 3 were axillary abscesses. In 125 non-lactating patients 109 were breast and 16 were axillary abscesses. Axillary abscesses were most commonly seen in non-lactating female as appose to breast abscesses were more common in lactating females. In axillary abscesses most had no growth on final culture, 2 were Mycobacterium tuberculosis, 1 was Pseudomonas aeruginosa and 1 was S. aureus.

The predominant organism isolated was Staphylococcus n=169 (60%). Among them n=86 (50.8%) were MRSA. Other growing organisms were Klebsiella pneumoniae, Bacteroides, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Streptococcus species and Mycobacterium tuberculosis as shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Isolated organisms based on culture report

Isolated Organism Count percentage
MRSA 84 31.3
MSSA 3 31
No Growth 76 28.4
Streptococcus 5 1.9
Mycobacterium tuberculosis 5 1.9
Klebsiella pneumoniae 4 1.5
Pseudomonas 3 1.1
Bacteroides 2 0.7
E. coli 2 0.7
MRSA + Pseudomonas aeruginosa 1 0.4
Propionobacterium species 1 0.4
Staphylococcus aureua (MRSA) + Klebsiella 1 0.4
Streptococcus milleri 1 0.4
Total 268 100

Out of 268 patients, 143 (53.4%) were lactational abscesses and 125 (46.6%) were non-lactational abscesses. In lactating patients, most common organisms found was MRSA (n=66), MSSA (n=49) and no growth in (n=23) patients. In non-lactating patients (n=125), 53 patients had no growth, 33 patients had MSSA and MRSA was found in 20 patients.

Both groups of the patients were compared for isolated organisms using chi square as a test of significance. Both group showed statistically significance difference in the organisms isolated. Details of the same are shown in Table 2.

Table 2.

Comparison of culture isolates between the lactating and the non-lactating groups.

Lactational status Organism Isolates Number of organism Isolated Percentage P-value
Lactational Klebsiella pneumoniae 1 0.7
MRSA 66 46.2
MSSA 49 34.3
No growth 23 16.1
Propionobacterium species 1 0.7
Pseudomonas aeruginosa 1 0.7
Streptococcus Milleri 1 0.7
Streptococcus 1 0.7
Total 143 100.0
Non-Lactational Bacteroides 2 1.6
E. coli 2 1.6 P<0.0001
Klebsiella pneumoniae 3 2.4
MRSA 18 14.4
MRSA + Pseudomonas aeruginosa 1 0.8
MSSA 33 26.4
No Gorowth 53 42.4
Pseudomonas aeruginosa 2 1.6
Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) + Klebsiella pneumoniae 1 0.8
Staphylococcus aureus 1 0.8
Streptococcus 4 3.2
Mycobacterium tuberculosis 5 4.0
Total 125 100.0

Sensitivity to augmentin (amoxicillin clavulanate) is checked in all cases as cloxacillin, indicates sensitivity to all beta lactam and beta lactam inhibitor combinations. Thus cloxacillin sensitive (MSSA) means sensitive to Augmentin and cloxacillin resistant (MRSA) means resistant to augmentin. In most patients empirical antibiotics prescribed was augmentin (Amoxicillin Clavulanate) before culture and later changed as per the clinical condition and cultures because most of cultures showed S. aureus MRSA which was resistant to augmentin.

Out of 268 patients, 168 patients had Staphylococci. Out of which 3 had MSSA, 84 had MRSA and 2 had MRSA with P. aeruginosa and K. pneumoniae. In case of MSSA, the preferred choice of empiric antibiotics based on the antibiogram showed good sensitivity with cloxacillin, clindamycin, ciprofloxacin, vancomycin, fuscidic acid and amikacin. However in case of MRSA, clindamycin, ciprofloxacin, vancomycin, fuscidic acid and amikacin had good sensitivities. Details of the same are shown in Table 3.

Table 3.

Comparison of isolated Staphylococcus aureus with antibiotics.

Cloxacillin Clindamycin Vancomycin Ciprofloxacin Fuscidic acid Amikacin
Organism S R S R S R S R S R S R
MSSA (82) 82 0 82 0 82 0 80 2 80 2 82 0
MRSA (84) 0 84 79 5 84 0 83 1 79 5 83 1
MRSA + Psuedomnas aeruginosa (1) 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0
MRSA + Klebsiella pneumoniae (1) 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

DISCUSSION

Staphylococcus aureus is known to be the most common pathogenic organism in breast abscesses, but here has been scarce data on microbiologic features of breast abscesses especially in Pakistan. In most of the patients presenting with breast abscesses, both in lactational and non-lactational groups, empirically given broad spectrum antibiotics includes Gram positive coverage where the penicillin group like amoxicillin clavulanate remains the treatment of choice (4, 10, 19). In patients with co-morbidities like diabetes or history of allergies and smokers, choice of empiric antibiotics is mostly ciprofloxacin and clindamycin (1719).

The abuse of commonly available antibiotics has led to the emergence of resistant organisms and perhaps the reason behind the resistance comes from community acquired cultures. Hence, we are prescribing empirical antibiotics which are most likely to be resistant in the very first place.

In 2008, Stafford and colleagues (29) found that the most common pathogen in clinically significant puerperal breast abscess in their population was community-acquired MRSA (67%, n=18). Their case number was small and their data came from women who required hospitalization over a 9-years span. Thomsen and colleagues (30) emphasized breast abscess drainage which increased favorable outcome by 50% and significantly decreased the duration of symptoms. In 96% of cases, appropriate antibiotics further reduced the persistent symptoms.

Walker et al. (12) showed that anaerobic and mix organisms more commonly seen in non-lactating females and in smokers and those who had recurrent abscess. In these patients, appropriate broad spectrum antibiotics started from the very beginning had beneficial effects. Our review of literature included studies from 1993 to 2015 to incorporate changing trends in MRSA development. The frequency of reported MRSA has ranged from 7% to 100% in the community setup in patients with breast abscess with a mean of around 51.8%. Though our study period covered 4 years from 2012 to 2015, our findings also corroborate the same mean percentage of 51% as per the literature search.

Etiology of rise in MRSA is not known. However it can be hypothesized that these lactating mothers might have had some hospital exposure that during their peripartum period could have led to emergence of MRSA. Further studies / prospective trials are needed to justify such an argument (3134).

In our study MRSA is the main organism. All MRSA were susceptible to ciprofloxacin, clindamycin, vancomycin, fuscidic acid and amikacin. Based on this premise, one can assume that the likely organism isolated will be MRSA which is likely going to be resistant to augmentin (amoxicillin clavulanate) as evident from our data. Hence plea for starting clindamycin or ciporfloxacin as first line or empiric treatment in patients with breast abscess can be made. Also clindamycin has a good anaerobic coverage hence would also cover the Bacteroides. Vancomycin is a treatment of choice either in MRSA or in patients with signs of systemic infection. For a simple breast abscess where outpatient oral therapy is warranted, choice of clindamycin and or ciprofloxacin is pretty reasonable. Also Clostridium difficile is not a problem for developing countries yet.

Our study is strengthened by the fact that it has the largest sample size reported so far. Since our centre is the largest referral centre in the region for breast disease, collected data can be considered as a good representation of the true community sample to make necessary inferences. Our study is limited by its retrospective design, lack of possible incomplete history regarding previous exposure and any intervention prior to hospital visit. Multicenter trials or collaborative data from the region can help us in validating our results. Also we lack facilities to confirm the source of MRSA whether its hospital or community acquired through testing by Pulsed-field Gel electrophoresis (PFGE) or testing for Panton Valentine Leukocidin (PVL). Some of the assumptions therefore would have limited inferences (3537).

In conclusion, MRSA is the most common organism seen in breast abscesses. Our first line treatment of antibiotics is likely to be resistant. Clindamycin and ciprofloxacin should be the preferred 1st choice of treatment.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Bharat A, Gao F, Aft RL, Gillanders WE, Eberlein TJ, Margenthaler JA. Predictors of primary breast abscesses and recurrence. World J Surg 2009; 33:2582–2586. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Foxman B, D'Arcy H, Gillespie B, Bobo JK, Schwartz K. Lactation mastitis: occurrence and medical management among 946 breastfeeding women in the United States. Am J Epidemiol 2002; 155:103–114. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Spencer JP. Management of mastitis in breastfeeding women. Am Fam Physician 2008; 78:727–731. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Kataria K, Srivastava A, Dhar A. Management of lactational mastitis and breast abscesses: review of current knowledge and practice. Indian J Surg 2013; 75:430–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Branch-Elliman W, Golen TH, Gold HS, Yassa DS, Baldini LM, Wright SB. Risk factors for Staphylococcus aureus post partum breast abscess. Clin Infect Dis 2012; 54:71–77. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Amir LH, Forster D, McLachlan H, Lumley J. Incidence of breast abscess in lactating women: report from an Australian cohort. BJOG 2004; 111:1378–1381. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Abudu L, Blair I, Fraise A, Cheng KK. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): a community-based prevalence survey. Epidemiol Infect 2001; 126:351–356. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Dener C, Inan A. Breast abscesses in lactating women. World J Surg 2003; 27:130–133. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Merz L, De Courten C, Orasch C. Breast infections. Rev Med Suisse 2014; 10:925–6. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Dennis CL, Schottle N, Hodnett E, McQueen K. An all-purpose nipple ointment versus lanolin in treating painful damaged nipples in breast feeding women: a randomized controlled trial. Breastfeed Med 2012; 7:473–479. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Ahluwalia IB, Morrow B, Hsia J. Why do women stop breastfeeding? Findings from the pregnancy risk assessment and monitoring system. Pediatrics 2005; 116:1408–1412. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Suthar KD, Mewada BN, Surati KN, Shah JK. Comparison of percutaneous ultrasound guided needle aspiration and open surgical drainage in management of puerperal breast abscess. Int J Med Sci Public Health 2013; 2:69–72. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Leung SS. Breast pain in lactating mothers. Hong Kong Med J 2016; 22:341–346. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Montalto M, Lui B. MRSA as a cause of postpartum breast abscess in infant and mother. J Hum Lact 2009; 25:448–450. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Abdelhadi MS, Bukharie HA. Breast infections in non-lactating women. J Family Community Med 2005; 12:133–137. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Trop I, Dugas A, David J, El Khoury M, Boileau JF, Larouche N, et al. Breast abscesses: evidence-based algorithms for diagnosis, management, and follow-up. Radiographics 2011; 31:1683–1699. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Branch-Elliman W, Lee GM, Golen TH, Gold HS, Baldini LM, Wright SB. Health and economic burden of post-partum Staphylococcus aureus breast abscess. PLoS One 2013; 8:e73155. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Chen CY, Anderson BO, Lo SS, Lin CH, Chen HM. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections may not impede the success of ultrasound-guided drainage of puerperal breast abscesses. J Am Coll Surg 2010; 210:148–154. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Walker AP, Edmiston CE, Jr, Krepel CJ, Condon RE. A prospective study of the microflora of non-puerperal breast abscess. Arch Surg 1988; 123:908–911. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Maudsley J, Stone SP, Kibbler CC, Iliffe SR, Conaty SJ, Cookson BD, et al. The community prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in older people living in their own homes: implications for treatment, screening and surveillance in the UK. J Hosp Infect 2004; 57:258–262. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Gould IM. Antibiotics, skin and soft tissue infection and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: cause and effect. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2009; 34:S8–11. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Moazzez A, Kelso RL, Towfigh S, Sohn H, Berne TV, Mason RJ. Breast abscess bacteriologic features in the era of community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus epidemics. Arch Surg 2007; 142:881–884. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Schoenfeld EM, McKay MP. Mastitis and methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): the calm before the storm? J Emerg Med 2010; 38(4):e31–34. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Chen KT, Huard RC, Della-Latta P, Saiman L. Prevalence of methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pregnant women. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 108: 482–487. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Irusen H, Rohwer AC, Steyn DW, Young T. Treatments for breast abscesses in breastfeeding women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015;(8):CD010490. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Crepinsek MA, Crowe L, Michener K, Smart NA. Interventions for preventing mastitis after childbirth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;(8):CD007239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Singla SL, Bishnoi PK, Kadian YS, Pawanjit, Jindal O. Evaluation of the role of antibiotics in the surgical management of breast abscess. Trop Doct 2002;32:165–166. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Jahanfar S, Ng CJ, Teng CL. Antibiotics for mastitis in breastfeeding women. Sao Paulo Med J 2016; 134:273. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Stafford I, Hernandez J, Laibl V, Sheffield J, Roberts S, Wendel G., Jr. Community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus among patients with puerperal mastitis requiring hospitalization. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 112:533–537. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Thomsen AC, Espersen T, Maigaard S. Course and treatment of milk stasis, noninfectious inflammation of the breast, and infectious mastitis in nursing women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984; 149:492–495. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Boccaccio C, Verdaguer Babic V, Botto L, Cervetto MM, Cetani S, Paladino S, et al. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolation in breast abscesses in a Public Maternity. Medicina (B Aires) 2014; 74:210–215. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Dabbas N, Chand M, Pallett A, Royle GT, Sainsbury R. Have the organisms that cause breast abscess changed with time? Implications for appropriate antibiotic usage in primary and secondary care. Breast J 2010; 16:412–415. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Chuwa EW, Wong CM, Tan YY, Hong GS. MRSA breast abscesses in postpartum women. Asian J Surg 2009; 32:55–58. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Berens P, Swaim L, Peterson B. Incidence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in postpartum breast abscesses. Breastfeed Med 2010; 5:113–115 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Bhatta DR, Cavaco LM, Nath G, Kumar K, Gaur A, Gokhale S, et al. Association of panton valentine Leukocidin (PVL) genes with methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in Western Nepal: a matter of concern for community infections (a hospital based prospective study). BMC Infect Dis 2016; 16:199. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Manara J, Shears P. More than just a simple abscess: could it be caused by Panton-Valentine leukocidin positive Staphylococcus aureus? J Laryngol Otol 2012; 126:325–327. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Rebic V, Budimir A, Aljicevic M, Bektas S, Vranic SM, Rebic D. Typing of Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Using DNA Fingerprints by Pulsed-field Gel Electrophoresis. Acta Inform Med 2016; 24:248–252. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Iranian Journal of Microbiology are provided here courtesy of Tehran University of Medical Sciences

RESOURCES