Doctor removed moles without biopsy

I had a suspicious looking mole on my chest biopsied.  The pathology report came back: compound melanocytic nevus with atypical features with the recommendation to remove the whole mole.  I also have 4 other odd looking moles, one under the arm, on the stomach and back.  I then went to the plastic surgeon to have them looked at.  He scheduled me for the following week to have all the moles removed.

Now, I have over one hundred stitches on my body!  The doctor said he removed all the moles and I had a layer of stitching beneath my skin as well as on my skin.  He sent them all to the lab for pathology.

Was it necessary for the doctor to remove all the moles when most of the moles were not biopsied to begin with?  I am very concerned that these were melanoma lesions since he removed them all and the tissue underneath.  Can you tell in surgery if the moles are really cancer?  Or was the doctor just an aggressive surgeon?

Thanks for your response in advance!

[Alan Rockoff, MD]

You don't necessarily need to biopsy a mole before removing it.  When you take the whole thing off, the pathologist gets to see the whole specimen.  You don't need to worry that the other 4 moles were melanomas.  As to whether they were suspicious enough to take off, i couldn't of course comment without having seen them.  In general, though, I would rely on a dermatologist to make that judgment and reserve the removal for the surgeon, if necessary.

When the biopsy reports come back, I would likewise ask the dermatologist to help interpret them and decide what if anything else needs to be done.

Best.

Dr. Rockoff

[evajean]

A related discussion, mole froze, no biopsy! scared was started.

[geniebro]

A related discussion, why biopsy birthmarks? was started.