So far I’ve had the mammo, a stereotactic breast biopsy, MRI and now they want to do an excisional biopsy under anesthesia. They keep saying “it’s not cancer” so what the hell are they doing? Is all of this to rule out cancer (they initially saw calcification on my mammo, no lumps) or are they sucking up Medicare?
These are questions your doctor should answer.
I assume they found something that they don’t think is cancer, but they want to be sure, so they want to biopsy it and have a pathologist look.
But i am not a doctor, and know little about breast cancer. You really do deserve a clear explanation from your doctors, however.
Thanks, my main doc is out for the month, trying to get a straight answer from her office is pissing me off
Been a nurse for 41 years. No one in that dr’s office is going to tell you anything more. It’s some unwritten rule. No other dr wants to seem like they are encroaching on another dr’s territory and nurses want to keep their job. Save your effort. It isn’t fair but it is how it is.
Here’s a little bit on biopsies. That they are calling it ‘excisional’ is good. They’re predicting that they will get it all out of there and find out what non-cancerous neoplasm it is. They will take out a large enough margin to be sure the neoplasm is not only all contained in the biopsied section but also that the margins are clear of anything worrisome such as cancer. That stereotactic biopsy snagged tissue that a pathologist determined wasn’t cancer if they are telling you it’s not cancer. They need to excise it, get it out, so it doesn’t obscure future mammograms, among other reasons.
There are a lot more profitable ways to suck up Medicare in needless procedures. This isn’t one of them.
The doctor is out for a month and no one else is authorized to take to the patients? That’s inexcusable. You’d get fired in industry if you left that long without arranging for any coverage for urgent questions. And “why do you want to cut a chuck out of my breast?” is an urgent question.
Thanks, BippityBoppityBoo.
That is a good explanation, excising something so as to not cloud future tests. I am hanging on to that one.
Puzzlegal, yes, there is another doc in her office I am referred to, to “talk” about the excisional biopsy, but I’m just not getting any answers. I need to push harder.
Nurses might talk to you, but they won’t expand into new information. They will repeat the information the dr gave when telling you of the need for the excisional biopsy, they might add some very generalized breast surgery information but they aren’t going to usurp that dr’s prerogative to be the one to deliver the diagnosis or results. I’m advising her to save that energy for talking with breast health advocacy centers, perhaps a support group to help get through the month waiting til the biopsy is done and read by the pathologist. Her energy would be better spent that way then tilting against that particular windmill.
Agreed, it certainly is. Much more so to the bearer of the breast than to the cutter who does 20 of those chunks out a week. To them (at least most of them) that is hand holding and not their job. They most likely think they explained the need to you enough when they got your permission for the stereotactic biopsy, from which it sounds like she got good ‘non-cancer’ news.
Do I wish doctors talked more to their patients, like most nurses do? Yes.
I’ve been around long enough to pick a different hill to die on and so live to fight another day.
Unfortunately, I have a little personal experience with this.
Hope you get good news, and keep us posted.
If the nurses aren’t allowed to tell the patient what’s going on, the doctor should designate someone, such as another doctor in the practice, to talk to their patients. Really, it’s unconscionable to leave someone hanging for a month with news like that.
You may be right that in practice, lots of doctors are unconscionable, but I’m damn well going to judge them for it.
At the absolute minimum, the OP should have access to the stereotactic biopsy report which details the precise pathologic finding that’s leading the breast surgeon to want to excise the area. If it’s a difficult/complex diagnosis, the OP may want to get a second opinion before surgery, either within the pathology group or by an outside expert consultant (this is frequently done).
But yes, there also should be a physician colleague of the practitioner out for the month who’s willing to answer questions about what the pathology report means and the standard of care.
For the record I did not say that in practice doctors are unconscionable. That is your inference, not mine.
I did say I wished that doctors talked more to patients, as most nurses do. There are many reasons why they usually don’t, but it is rarely because of a dearth of conscience.
I’m confused. Your thread title says “possible breast cancer,” but your OP says it’s not cancer. What exactly have your doctors told you? From reading your OP, it sounds like they saw something in your breast that should be removed but is not cancerous.
You said that no one would be available to talk to the op until the doctor returned in a month. Yes, i consider that unconscionable.
I work in a healthcare-adjacent field. As such, I have daily contact with various doctor’s offices. Some offices are much better than others in communication, followup, etc. I would advise the OP to look for a different doctor.
I do have one thought: @dummygladhands71 do you have a primary care doctor? If so, tell them what’s happening and see if they can follow up directly to get more information. In a similar situation (different disease), I was able to get useful information this way and actually got the specialist’s office to follow up with me within days instead of weeks. At a minimum, they may be able to translate the report and help you understand exactly what’s happening and why.
My best wishes. Please keep us posted.
While I was under care for colorectal adenocarcinoma [twice, we thought it was gone with just chemo and radiation, for 19 months the sigss came back clear, then month 21 BAM - a tumor the size of half a golf ball. Back into chemo, after 6 infusions, the midway CT and it had gotten larger - have a pic of it, it was a round ball size of a golf ball and a sort of curving thin ‘arm’ that made my friend say I had a butt goblin, so we named it Little Donnie because like his namesake, he was a pain in my arse] SO I had instant surgery [barbie butt, now I poo in a bag, lost 20 cm of the far end of my gut. Surgeon was amused when I likened it to field cleaning a deer, but they sewed me up instead of plucking all the guts =) ] At about 5 months after that, I was doing the ritual monthly breast self check and found an odd raised sort of spongy spot. Since I was having bloodwork prior to the 6 month imaging, I asked to see my oncologist, he poked and prodded, decided to go ahead with the normal imaging, then looked at the results, added a needle biopsy, determined it needed to come out, it biopsied as cancerous [but not related to my C-R adenocarcinoma]
Had surgery, margins came back clear, they shot my nipple area with blue dye/radioisotopic goop so they could check the sentinal glands in that side armpit, were clear, but they opted to take 3 out for biopsy anyway.
Left me with a funky sort of nipple area, it is almost rigid to the touch [like the aureole area was in a deep freeze, you know how the skin will sort of crinkle up?] so they checked it out and took a needle biopsy of it, checked it out and it is just sort of funky, not cancerous or anything [they think it is some sort of funky sensitivity reaction] that has reduced in effect over the past 18 months.
So there are actually a bunch of different things the mass could be, ranging from a cyst, to a fibroid lump, to a totally benign fat tumor called a lipoma, to a funky sort of tumor called a teratoma [normally those are in ovaries, but they can actually grow anywhere - mine had teeth and hair @_@]
See of your office has something like My Chart - I get imaging, test results - both interpreted and raw data [after 6 years, I can read a CBC like a freaking pro. And oddly CT scans, I know what everything looks like and is supposed to look like.]*
- I was showing my mom in law [the nurse] my sister in law [the nurse] and my niece [the nurse] my latest CT, and their comment on looking at it, and seeing the bone structure going down the spine was more or less ‘vertebra, vertebra, vertebra, what the hell is that mass of calcium shards!’ and ‘ooo, damn, those hip sockets look painful’ and I have 6 years of CBCs, blood panels, and biopsies.
I whined and bitched and found an office person who showed me the magic key to my reports from all of the tests. Yay. And, everyone of them says, “further investigation is needed.”
Thanks to all, Sunny Daze, my PCP is fairly good, but it’s 113 in Arizona, it seems everyone is working short hours or no hours. I haven’t had her get back to me, but I am satisfied now with having seen the reports. Why the hell did I have to carry on to see them, I’ll never know. The practice has a “portal” but it’s not customer friendly, and no one but this one sweet lady could be bothered telling me that all my info is there.
Oof. They’re not doing a very good job. My oncologist showed me and my dad the CAT scan showing my endometrial cancer at my initial consult. My dad had questions - former anatomy professor - while I just stared.
Even my radiologist showed me an image. It was PULSING. I was horrified.
Because I was diagnosed at Stage 2 or 3 they really rushed me into treatment so there is stuff I am still learning (no one told me the port is supposed to be completely subdermal!) but I’d rather they do things this way to give me better chances.
Some years back, a mammogram revealed microcalcifications in one breast. The docs decided to do an excisional biopsy under anesthesia, just as your doc is recommending. They said microcalcifications are usually benign, but they can indicate pre-cancerous or very early cancerous changes in the breast tissue. Sometimes radiologists can tell if they’re benign just by examining the mammogram, but sometimes they can’t. In my case, the specks were clustered, which was the factor that indicated excision was necessary. I got the all-clear.
IANAD and don’t claim my case is representative. I just thought it might explain why microcalcifications may need to be excised even though they’re highly unlikely to be cancerous.
Thanks!! Exactly what they’re seeing with me.