Aa
Biopsy or not?
Hopefully someone can give me some insight and suggestions what to ask before my dr sends me for a biopsy.
I'm almost 44, with a family history of BC. My mother was dx with BC at age 38 and got rid of it; then developed it again and then ovarian cancer and then BC again and died from it spreading at age 52. I had a BRACA test done in 2009 that said I had 0% chance of breast/ovarian cancer.
12/5/2005 Bilateral Diagnostic Mammogram
nothing was found - Bi-rads 1PF - negative category
Notees: Evenly distributed fibroglandular tissue with a large amount of fibrofatty stroma
6/26/2009 Bilateral Screening Mammogram
Benign Calcifications on the left breast without suspicious change - Bi-Rads 2 - Benign
Notes: Moderately dense breasts in a patchy fashion with vague nodularity on the left without new spiculation
2/28/2011 CAD mammogram
shows scattered fibrograndular densities
In the central L breast, 5 cm posterior to the nipple, there is a circumscribed round 0.8cm mass that needs further assessment.
I have to go for a compression mammo and possibly a biopsy next week, but reading I don't think this is anything to worry about. I want to make sure since I won't see my dr until next week, plus I don't want to have an unnecessary procedure if I don't have to.
Does anyone know if anything in my mammo's look suspicious or have changed so much where they would suggest more testing? Any idea what these mammo's mean? I don't understand where the calcifications from 6/26 went to; do they just go away?
I'm almost 44, with a family history of BC. My mother was dx with BC at age 38 and got rid of it; then developed it again and then ovarian cancer and then BC again and died from it spreading at age 52. I had a BRACA test done in 2009 that said I had 0% chance of breast/ovarian cancer.
12/5/2005 Bilateral Diagnostic Mammogram
nothing was found - Bi-rads 1PF - negative category
Notees: Evenly distributed fibroglandular tissue with a large amount of fibrofatty stroma
6/26/2009 Bilateral Screening Mammogram
Benign Calcifications on the left breast without suspicious change - Bi-Rads 2 - Benign
Notes: Moderately dense breasts in a patchy fashion with vague nodularity on the left without new spiculation
2/28/2011 CAD mammogram
shows scattered fibrograndular densities
In the central L breast, 5 cm posterior to the nipple, there is a circumscribed round 0.8cm mass that needs further assessment.
I have to go for a compression mammo and possibly a biopsy next week, but reading I don't think this is anything to worry about. I want to make sure since I won't see my dr until next week, plus I don't want to have an unnecessary procedure if I don't have to.
Does anyone know if anything in my mammo's look suspicious or have changed so much where they would suggest more testing? Any idea what these mammo's mean? I don't understand where the calcifications from 6/26 went to; do they just go away?
Just a thought, but could the round mass be an intramammary lymph node? Hopefully the additional views will determine what it is, but I have what the radiologist determined to be a probable lymph node that showed up on MRI. It's currently being monitored every six months for stability and no biopsy is required. You may want to ask your doctor about this after the compression mammo, but lymph nodes in the breast are pretty common and benign.
IF you do need a biopsy, please don't stress too much over it. Like zouzi said, they really aren't as bad as we imagine they'll be. I've had three different types of biopsies and none was as bad as I thought it would be. The wait for the results is the worst, but then you have peace of mind knowing "what is" rather than worrying about "what ifs". Just try to stay positive and take one step at a time.
I'm wishing you all the best, no biopsy needed and benign results if one's necessary.
nc
IF you do need a biopsy, please don't stress too much over it. Like zouzi said, they really aren't as bad as we imagine they'll be. I've had three different types of biopsies and none was as bad as I thought it would be. The wait for the results is the worst, but then you have peace of mind knowing "what is" rather than worrying about "what ifs". Just try to stay positive and take one step at a time.
I'm wishing you all the best, no biopsy needed and benign results if one's necessary.
nc
I'm not sure anyone can (except the radiologist) can say for sure that the calcifications "disappeared."
It may just be that they were the most notable finding previously, but in the the latest mammogram, there was an actaul mass detected, which would now be a more specific and notable finding to be remarked upon and recommended for further assessment...
In response to the confusion you expressed in your journal about calcifications and micro- calcifications, I am sending you a couple of relevant articles in a private message.
Best wishes...
It may just be that they were the most notable finding previously, but in the the latest mammogram, there was an actaul mass detected, which would now be a more specific and notable finding to be remarked upon and recommended for further assessment...
In response to the confusion you expressed in your journal about calcifications and micro- calcifications, I am sending you a couple of relevant articles in a private message.
Best wishes...
Mass,nodule,lump,lesion,all mean the same thing.Radiologists can use any of these terms, when they detect a growth on a mammogram.
ok that makes sense...but something else confuses me - when they say "mass" and doesn't specify what it is - that's considered a lump?
You don't have to be sorry to ask questions! We are here to help you as best we can :)
Now, about the calcification seen on your mammogram in 2009, the report stated that they were "benign" and the radiologist was confident enough to report a BI-RADS category 2,meaning just that."Benign"
Calcifications are quite normal in breast tissue and they are not harmful. However, when they grow in a certain pattern, they become suspicious because they sometimes cluster around a mass.But that wasn't seen in your case in 2009.
The report on your 2011 mammogram ,does not mention any calcification,but only a very small lump which could very well be a fibroadenoma or perhaps a cyst( both benign) that needs further evaluation.Sometimes benign calcification do disappear and that's why it was not mentioned in your latest mammogram?.
Calcifications are not lumps and lumps are not calcifications.They are two different things.
When clustered calcifications are seen on a mammogram,they could indicate that there might be an underlying problem.
Radiologist's decisions about the characteristics of a lesion identified on screening are made based on diagnostic mammographic images(the test that you'll soon have) and not the screening views alone.
Once the nodule characteristics are clearly seen on your spot compression mammogram,you never know...Could be that you don't need a biopsy after all..
Good luck to you! :)
Now, about the calcification seen on your mammogram in 2009, the report stated that they were "benign" and the radiologist was confident enough to report a BI-RADS category 2,meaning just that."Benign"
Calcifications are quite normal in breast tissue and they are not harmful. However, when they grow in a certain pattern, they become suspicious because they sometimes cluster around a mass.But that wasn't seen in your case in 2009.
The report on your 2011 mammogram ,does not mention any calcification,but only a very small lump which could very well be a fibroadenoma or perhaps a cyst( both benign) that needs further evaluation.Sometimes benign calcification do disappear and that's why it was not mentioned in your latest mammogram?.
Calcifications are not lumps and lumps are not calcifications.They are two different things.
When clustered calcifications are seen on a mammogram,they could indicate that there might be an underlying problem.
Radiologist's decisions about the characteristics of a lesion identified on screening are made based on diagnostic mammographic images(the test that you'll soon have) and not the screening views alone.
Once the nodule characteristics are clearly seen on your spot compression mammogram,you never know...Could be that you don't need a biopsy after all..
Good luck to you! :)
One more question sorry :(
could the calcifications from 6/26/2009 be the mass now they're seeing?
The old radiologist didn't send the films and sono to my new imaging place as requested; so I had to call and talk to them and tell them to send them - even then they questioned why lol some places are a pain about medical records. My gyn 2 weeks ago wanted me to do the new CAD mammo after my visit so I had to switch facilities.
Any type of medical procedure scares me; I have malignant heart arrhythmia's - the reason for my ICD, I just never know when my heart's going to act all weird on me....but I trust my GYN I've gone to him since 1998 and whatever he says I'll do.
could the calcifications from 6/26/2009 be the mass now they're seeing?
The old radiologist didn't send the films and sono to my new imaging place as requested; so I had to call and talk to them and tell them to send them - even then they questioned why lol some places are a pain about medical records. My gyn 2 weeks ago wanted me to do the new CAD mammo after my visit so I had to switch facilities.
Any type of medical procedure scares me; I have malignant heart arrhythmia's - the reason for my ICD, I just never know when my heart's going to act all weird on me....but I trust my GYN I've gone to him since 1998 and whatever he says I'll do.
Hi again Lisa,
Experienced radiologists are pretty good in detecting something suspicious when they study mammograms,ultrasound etc...
Sometimes a spot compression mammogram is required when things are not seen clearly,especially when breasts are dense.
I am afraid that there is no other way, to know for sure the nature of a lump,except by having a biopsy.
Because you have a strong family history of breast cancer, ( So sorry for your mom)
puts you at a higher risk and you have to be vigilant,but it doesn't mean that you will also get the disease.
If I were you, I would welcome a biopsy (if required),just to make sure about what's going on... but mostly to have peace of mind.
A biopsy is a simple procedure,and you shouldn't dread it.When I had mine done,it was almost painless,quick and left no visible scar.
I think that you'll be just fine Lisa,just follow whatever your doctor recommends okay?
Take care...
Experienced radiologists are pretty good in detecting something suspicious when they study mammograms,ultrasound etc...
Sometimes a spot compression mammogram is required when things are not seen clearly,especially when breasts are dense.
I am afraid that there is no other way, to know for sure the nature of a lump,except by having a biopsy.
Because you have a strong family history of breast cancer, ( So sorry for your mom)
puts you at a higher risk and you have to be vigilant,but it doesn't mean that you will also get the disease.
If I were you, I would welcome a biopsy (if required),just to make sure about what's going on... but mostly to have peace of mind.
A biopsy is a simple procedure,and you shouldn't dread it.When I had mine done,it was almost painless,quick and left no visible scar.
I think that you'll be just fine Lisa,just follow whatever your doctor recommends okay?
Take care...
thank you =) I'm going to ask also to my GYN about the 2006 findings; maybe with the difference in technolgy with the new CAD I had is why no calcifications were shown; and they weren't really there before?
It's a pain to redo the mammo's because I have an ICD on that side; which hurts when they compress but has never hurt before. The set I had done 2 weeks ago pulled too much so they had to do it in 2 sections, but they must be done just in case =) I'm just a baby hehehe
Is there any other way to find out if it's benign instead of a biopsy? I really don't want to have one done.
It's a pain to redo the mammo's because I have an ICD on that side; which hurts when they compress but has never hurt before. The set I had done 2 weeks ago pulled too much so they had to do it in 2 sections, but they must be done just in case =) I'm just a baby hehehe
Is there any other way to find out if it's benign instead of a biopsy? I really don't want to have one done.
Hi,
Your first mammograms done in 2005 with a BI-RADS Category 1,means "Normal "
There are no suspicious masses or calcifications to report; tissue looks healthy.
Your second mammogram done in 2009 with a BI-RADS category 2,means "Benign"
Breasts are same size and shape and tissue looks normal. Any cysts, fibroadenomas,calcifications or other masses appear benign.
Your last mammogram done this year,shows a circumscribed round nodule that needs to be further evaluated by having a spot compression mammogram that will focus on this particular nodule for better assessment.
Depending on how this nodule appears to the radiologist, a biopsy might be needed or just be monitored by subsequent tests in the future.
In your case, the fact that the benign calcifications noted previously (in 2006) disappeared,is a good sign and could mean that the nodule to be further evaluated is probably benign.
Keep in mind that even if a biopsy is needed,it doesn't mean that the results will be bad.Many biopsies return a benign finding in the majority of cases.
I hope that all will turn up just fine for you :)
Best wishes and good luck!
Your first mammograms done in 2005 with a BI-RADS Category 1,means "Normal "
There are no suspicious masses or calcifications to report; tissue looks healthy.
Your second mammogram done in 2009 with a BI-RADS category 2,means "Benign"
Breasts are same size and shape and tissue looks normal. Any cysts, fibroadenomas,calcifications or other masses appear benign.
Your last mammogram done this year,shows a circumscribed round nodule that needs to be further evaluated by having a spot compression mammogram that will focus on this particular nodule for better assessment.
Depending on how this nodule appears to the radiologist, a biopsy might be needed or just be monitored by subsequent tests in the future.
In your case, the fact that the benign calcifications noted previously (in 2006) disappeared,is a good sign and could mean that the nodule to be further evaluated is probably benign.
Keep in mind that even if a biopsy is needed,it doesn't mean that the results will be bad.Many biopsies return a benign finding in the majority of cases.
I hope that all will turn up just fine for you :)
Best wishes and good luck!
Have an Answer?
You are reading content posted in the Breast Cancer Community
A quick primer on the different ways breast cancer can be treated.
Diet and digestion have more to do with cancer prevention than you may realize
From mammograms to personal hygiene, learn the truth about these deadly breast cancer rumors.
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
