DCIS microcalcs: Why do some grow/change and others don't?

CrunchyPoodleMama

DCIS microcalcs: Why do some grow/change and others don't?

CrunchyPoodleMama

This is such a newbie question; I should be an expert by now! but I'm curious to get your take:

I've had one lumpectomy and one re-excision. It was about 5 months between the two (long story as to why, but that's what happened).

Mammo before first lumpectomy showed a lot of clustered and linear microcalcifications. Turned out to be a large area of DCIS.

Didn't get clear margins... 5 months after surgery, mammo showed a tiny circular area of microcalcifications. It's obvious that the DCIS cells that had been left behind had started to grow. (Thank God, final pathology was still just DCIS.)

Re-excision took care of the new circular microcalcs... but, this teeny-tiny little constellation of microcalcs appeared on post-reexcision mammo.

These were not new... they matched microcalcs from the original mammo... they were just missed by the surgery.

They look identical to how they looked before the first surgery. Why would that be? Why didn't they grow slightly like the other DCIS microcalcs did?

I will have them biopsied, although my surgeon is adamant that they'll turn out to be DCIS that was missed and that I'll need a mastectomy.

The more I think about it, the more crazy it seems that just because of one teeny-tiny spot that was missed (it was "anterior" to the lumpectomy site, so next to the muscle I assume?), that means I should have all my other healthy breast tissue removed in a mastectomy.

Anybody have any thoughts as to why one spot of DCIS would grow over 5 months, but another tiny little set of microcalcs would look exactly the same?

almagetty

I don't have a comment as to the microcalcifications, but I think that "anterior" means "in front of", so I believe the area you are talking about is closer to the skin surface. If it were behind the lumpectomy site, I think it would be labeled as "posterior" or "deep".

CrunchyPoodleMama

almagetty, duh, thank you; I had an idiot moment confusing anterior and posterior... sorry about that and thanks for the correction! (It was late and I was sleep-deprived; what can I say! LOL)

I just got the radiologist report emailed to me, and it's only BIRADS 4. I don't get it; why wouldn't it be BIRADS 5 or 6 if they're sure it's DCIS? I guess what I'm hoping is that since those particular microcalcifications haven't changed at all (whereas others did, the ones that were now removed), that maybe these aren't DCIS... I'm sure that's wildly improbable though. *sigh*

Anonymous

crunchy-----even with your history of DCIS, it's still possible that this other set of calcifications are benign. Praying you get good results son.

anne