I'm a "take it off, take it all off" kind of gal! They say there is no difference but for my peace of mind, I don't want them on me. I don't need them and I don't miss it. Other one comes off in March (they waited so they could use my skin) and I wish they had taken it off at the same time as the first one, last March.
Best of luck. Whatever you decide will be the best decision for YOU :)
I had a similarly small but invasive carcinoma in situ. (this was 14 years ago, so keep that in mind--treatments have changed).
I chose mastectomy instead of lumpectomy and radiation. My rationale was that I had very small breasts, and a lumpectomy would have been very disfiguring--I always thought a "lumpectomy" sounded like a small operation. I was shocked to hear they would remove more like a quarter of my breast.
Plus I did not want radiation and its side effects.
So I had modified radical mastectomy with immediate reconstruction. No other treatment was necessary (negative nodes). I had a great cosmetic result, and I've never regretted my decision.
The next year I had another mastectomy w reconstruction on the other side.
But the choices are obviously different for every woman. I wanted to be done with it, and to get back to work as quickly as possible, to have a good cosmetic result, and to not have to go through weeks of radiation.
Other women opt for lumpectomy and radiation and are equally happy. Good luck with your decision, and I hope everything turns out well.
You need to do whatever it is you want to do, whatever is going to give you the most "peace" I went through 2 lumpectomies, because that is what my surgeon and my husband wanted me to do, when I knew in my heart I wanted a mastectomy to rid me of the cancer. After the 2 lumpectomies, they had to do a mastectomy anyway because they could not get clear margins. It was a huge weight off of me when the breast was finally gone. I am now looking forward to new perky breasts. Only you will know what is right for you. Good luck and God Bless.