According to my surgeon - yes.  I wasn't a candidate for the stereotactic, so I
had the surgical biopsy.  It was a piece of cake, but mine was closer to the
surface than yours. The doc's right that even tough the calcifications are
grouped in a line they're still 80% likely to be benign, so try not to get too
worked up over it just yet.  In my case they were not benign - too bad I can't
be the exception when buying a lottery ticket <g>.  Mine was caught really
early though, so treatment (radiation after lumpectomy, now 5 years of
tamoxifen) was a breeze.  Breast Cancer is scary, but it's not always a
worst-case scenario.  There are several of us who had it, got rid of it, and
had minimum disruption to our lives in the process (the lucky ones I guess).
So, stay positive until you know for sure!

Sue - DivaofDVC   aka WDW1972
DVC '97   OKW, Beach Club, Vero Beach, & Hilton Head

Yes a "surgical biopsy" is essentially the same procedure as a lumpectomy,
the difference is mostly one of attitude.  A surgical biopsy is primarily
exploratory whereas a lumpectomy goes straight to an already identified
volume of tissue.  Of course one hopes that if a surgical biopsy proves
positive, it will have already removed all the cancerous tissue.  As with a
lumpectomy, the "margins" are checked, and if cancer is detected close to
the cut surface, further surgery is performed.

From the patient's point of view there is, as far as I know, no difference.

Good luck with the radiologist.

Tim Jackson

Hi, Denise,

Welcome to the group (sorry you need to be here)!  As others have noted,
the odds are on your side -- there's a very good chance the suspicious
areas are benign.  And, even if that proves not to be the case, they
appear quite tiny, so you will have caught them early, with likelihood
of a relatively easy course of treatment and excellent odds of long-term
recovery.

Even for those who, like me, have had locally advanced cancer, the
modern treatments are quite successful.  At age 45, I had 5 tumors
(largest 3.1 cm) in one breast, 1 tumor in the other breast, and cancer
cells in one of my lymph nodes.  Three years later, I'm doing great --
NED (no evidence of disease).  And I'm in better shape than I have been
in 20+ years (thanks to my breast cancer survivors' rowing team).

On my rowing team, there are others with similar stories:  One woman had
breast cancer 17 years ago, when she was about 42.  Another had (early)
*stage 4* breast cancer, the highest stage & usually considered
terminal, about 5 years ago, and is also now NED at age 39.  A third had
a tumor over 7 cm, and is also more than 5 years post-diagnosis and NED
at age 50.

While I always say that chemotherapy and radiation were a rotten hobby,
it was do-able.  The things you read in popular magazines, or anecdotes
from those who went through it several years or more ago when management
of side effects was not as advanced, might lead you to believe it is
worse than it really proves to be for most of us.

Please ask us any questions you may have -- we understand that this is a
scary process, regardless of how well things turn out.  And, if you get
good news, we hope you'll share it . . . this group just *loves* good news.

Take care,

Ann T.
Remove 'dontsendspam' from address to reply by email