I'm 41 years old and recently had my first mammogram completed. I did not feel any lump or other symptoms and was only going as a recommended check up now that I'm over 40. Two days after the mammogram, I received a call and was told that I had been booked for an ultrasound in the next couple of days. When I asked why, they gave me very little information other than something was found on the mammogram the radiologist needed to check further. About half way through the ultrasound exam, the radiologist asked me if I was having any nipple discharge. I replied "no" but, felt the question was odd as I had already told her I wasn't there because I had any symptoms. When I asked her if everything looked normal, she was vague, commented having cysts was normal and "they'd compare the results of the mammogram against the ultrasound and get back to me in 5 to 6 days". My gut told me she wasn't giving me the complete picture and had seen something during the exam. Two days later, I received a call from my GP who told me the radiologist wanted me to come in for a biopsy. She said I had a number of little cysts but, one mass that did not look like a cyst and they just wanted to check it out. Again, not much details....my question is: should I be assuming this is a solid mass? (My understanding is ultrasound is used to determine cysts (fluid) and non-cysts (solid). ) And why would the radiologist ask if I had nipple discharge during the ultrasound unless she saw something that prompted her to ask the question? Why is everyone so vague? Please advise.