Re: Nipple piercing caused abscess?!
From: Anna (anonymous@obgyn.net)
Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:24:40 -0500 (CDT)
Hi,
I have four earrings in one ear, so you might call me "piercing
positive", but please don't be opposed to the possibility that your
doctor might be right. Of course the piercing itself doesn't cause the
infection, but it is an entrance for germs that otherwise wouldn't
exist. Maybe this one particular piercing just isn't supposed to be? Is
it worth these complications?
--
Anna
(BTW, my last piercing, through cartilage, took a year to heal. I stuck
with it, but if there had been more than occasional pain, I grudgingly
would have abandoned it.)
At Thu, 26 Oct 2000, Mai wrote:
>
>I am 20 yrs old and 2 days ago I noticed a hard lump in my right breast.
>The lump is about ½ - 2 inches in diameter. It is underneath the areola
>and part of it towards the center of my body. The lump also feels
>perfectly circular and in a dome shape. The skin is slightly darker
>where the lump is located. There is pain and increases with pressure. I
>had noticed pain in my right breast for several weeks but it was always
>brief and I didn't think much of it. The skin surrounding the lump is
>slightly darker. It is mobile yet anchored to the surrounding flesh and
>breast has increased in size. There is no discharge, and it visually
>does not look infected. I also do not menstruate as I am on Depo.
>
>I went to the health clinic yesterday as an emergency and was sent
>immediately to the ultrasound clinic. After the ultrasound I returned
>to the health clinic and they told me the ultrasound doctor diagnosed
>that the lump was an abscess due to a staph infection because of my
>nipple piercing.
>
>My nipples, pierced the first week of September, had never had any
>infections or problems. The ultrasound clinic was very negative towards
>my piercing (made negative comments towards me) and did not answer any
>of my questions. The fact that I looked very young for my age and had
>funky colored hair did not help. They told me to immediately remove the
>piercing.
>
>According to my online research: all the piercing studios and piercing
>organizations all state to NOT remove the piercing if there is an
>infection. The piercing never causes the infection but can act as a
>conduit for bacteria to get in. As a conduit it can also allow the
>infection to get out. There are weak points in the lump and if it ever
>ruptures, the bacteria can drain out of the piercing. If the piercing
>is removed the infection is completely trapped inside your body and is
>harder to treat..
>
>I've also talked to one of the most reputable piercer in Toronto and he
>stressed that I should not remove it. That it MIGHT not be an abscess
>but an allergic reaction to one of one of my daily products. He stated
>that if he was the doctor that he would perform a fine needle aspiration
>as well as administer antibiotics (the clinic had stated they use this
>method only if the antibiotics (cloxacillin) has no effect). But, since
>can't do that he told me to take the antibiotics, use hot compresses,
>and soak in hot salt water and lightly squeeze the piercing to try to
>drain it.
>
>The ultrasound doctor was very piercing negative and it was very likely
>that she knew nothing about piercings. From my research, I learned that
>most doctors are piercing negative and their reaction is to remove the
>piercing. I questioned the health clinic doctor and she admits that she
>has no knowledge about piercings (I admired her for admitting that).
>
>My questions are:
>1. Is it a guarantee that it is an abscess?
>2. Should I keep the ring?
>3. Is the ultrasound doctor permitted to act knowledgeable in an area
>where she has no experience?
>4. Could I ask for a fine needle aspiration?
>5. Could the abscess seem to disappear but still be there? If so how
>can I be sure that it has disappeared?
>6. Can this abscess recur in several months?
![[ Women's Health Forum ]](http://www.obgyn.net/images_women/wh-forum.gif)