search:

Re: microcalcifications

From: Deborah (anonymous@obgyn.net)
Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:27:57 -0600 (CST)

At Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Hannah Brooks, MD wrote: >
>Dear Deborah-
>Microcalcifications are sometimes an indication of early breast
>cancer when seen on a mammogram. Most of the time, they are there due
>to aging, old injury, old infection , or other benign causes.
>It sounds as if the proper evaluation of these microcalcifications
>was performed and there is nothing to pursue at this time. This is
>assuming all tests are stable. There are rare instances in which very
>slow growing breast cancers do not appear as a change on the
>mammogram for many years. You should not be overly concerned simply
>because the insurance requires additional information.
>If you or your doctor are concerned about the calcifications and
>would rather not watch and wait, sometimes for years, then you can
>see about getting a tissue diagnosis. This may be easily done with
>stereotactic (non surgical)biopsy; the best person to advise you
>regarding this type of biopsy would be a radiologist or surgeon who
>performs the procedure.
>Hannah Brooks, MD,FACS
>I guess what I was asking does this put me at signifcant risk of developing cancer down the road enough for them to deny coverage of that. What percent develop over the long term and at what point if they are thought to be stable does that risk decrease.
>------------------ Reply Separator --------------------
>Originally From: anonymous@medispecialty.com (Deborah Haight)
>------------------ Reply Separator --------------------
>------------------ Reply Separator --------------------
>------------------ Reply Separator --------------------
>Subject: microcalcifications
>------------------ Reply Separator --------------------
>Date: 12/03/2001 02:17pm
>------------------ Reply Separator --------------------
>
>------------------ Reply Separator --------------------
>I have a question about microcalcifications. I had a abnormal
>mamogram
>about 22 months ago and was called back to have a cone view taken of
>one
>breast. I was told at this time that the miocrocalcifications were
>probably beign and I should resume my normal schedule of annual
>mamograms. Because I was still somewhat nervous about this My Dr at
>the
>time order a repeat cone view of the same breast 6 months later at my
>request not a medical reason. I was told they were stable probably
>beign and to resume my normal schedule of mamograms. I had another
>one
>6 months later of both breasts to get back on schedule and was told
>that
>the calcifications remained stable and everything was fine. Due again
>in Feb 2002. I was okay with this until last week when due to a job
>change we needed to buy personal insurance instead of group and was
>told
>that my breast needed to ridered due to calcifications. Question is
>this really that much of a concern as far as developing cancer. They
>have me concerned.

Enter search keywords:
Returns per screen: Require all keywords:
Return to [ Breast Health Forum ] Mail a New Message to the Forum: breast-health@obgyn.net
Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net
Last Updated: Sat Jan 26 12:29:26 2008

Women's Insurance Checklist from Auto Insurance Quote

home | medical professionals | women | industry | forums | international
e-mail | about us | advertising | our sponsors | contact us | disclaimer |

This information is provided for educational purposes only.
Please read the disclaimer. ©1996-2008, all rights reserved.
Do not reproduce without permission of MediSpecialty.com