HER2 Support Group Forums - View Single Post

AlaskaAngel · 03-12-2010, 11:30 AM

Unless the onc has other qualities that outweigh the lack of the completeness of the exam, I would choose someone else. But I have debated the question of having the breasts palpated for lumps with my PCP. The problem I have with having them is not serious enough to keep me from having the palpation done, but still I want to raise the question...

In general, lumps have to be close to 1 cm before they can be palpated. The majority of humans who are told they don't have a lump are inclined to automatically believe that they are "okay", and having a professional complete the exam on a yearly basis like the mammogram and then tell them no lump is felt reinforces the assumption that everything is just dandy, and off they go for another year. Most of the time that works fine. And for those who have a lump palpated, the whole idea works to get them in line for further investigation. It is just a very rough estimation, not a definite conclusion.

Many people have no idea that something as small as 1 cm is as meaningful as it is when it comes to breast cancer progression.

I just have reservations about the false sense of security that can be created with examination by palpation. For someone whose lump is just a tad too small to feel at the time, it leaves most of a year before the next exam for that tiny lump to grow. It makes me think that it might be more reasonable to choose to have palpation at one time of the year, and then have the annual mammogram 6 months later.

So I continue to debate this question with my providers, and I have chosen to alternate my mammogram and the palpation exam in that way.

A.A.

03-12-2010, 11:30 AM	#5
AlaskaAngel Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Alaska Posts: 2,018	Re: Clinical Breast Exams Unless the onc has other qualities that outweigh the lack of the completeness of the exam, I would choose someone else. But I have debated the question of having the breasts palpated for lumps with my PCP. The problem I have with having them is not serious enough to keep me from having the palpation done, but still I want to raise the question... In general, lumps have to be close to 1 cm before they can be palpated. The majority of humans who are told they don't have a lump are inclined to automatically believe that they are "okay", and having a professional complete the exam on a yearly basis like the mammogram and then tell them no lump is felt reinforces the assumption that everything is just dandy, and off they go for another year. Most of the time that works fine. And for those who have a lump palpated, the whole idea works to get them in line for further investigation. It is just a very rough estimation, not a definite conclusion. Many people have no idea that something as small as 1 cm is as meaningful as it is when it comes to breast cancer progression. I just have reservations about the false sense of security that can be created with examination by palpation. For someone whose lump is just a tad too small to feel at the time, it leaves most of a year before the next exam for that tiny lump to grow. It makes me think that it might be more reasonable to choose to have palpation at one time of the year, and then have the annual mammogram 6 months later. So I continue to debate this question with my providers, and I have chosen to alternate my mammogram and the palpation exam in that way. A.A.