<p>Both dense breasts and HRT are risk factors for breast cancer, although these are only two of the many risk factors for BC such as smoking, obesity, heavy alcohol use, DES exposure, family history and certain benign breast conditions.</p>
<p>From the American Cancer Society:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I requested a follow-up ultrasound after my (3-D) mammogram last year. I learned from the Breast Center that I could request the ultrasound due to two previous diagnoses of dense breasts - in other words, no doctor needed. The radiologist and I visited while I had the ultrasound. He highly recommends 3-D mammograms for reasons of clarity. He suggested a yearly mammogram followed by an ultrasound every other year (at least, for me).</p>
<p>The 3-D mammogram cost me $50 out-of-pocket. (I wouldn’t incur any cost for a 2-D mammogram - part of my well-woman.) The ultrasound cost $120-150; I don’t remember exactly. I haven’t met medical deductibles, so have no idea how - or even if - that would affect costs. The Breast Centers here just inform people that the 3-D is $50 extra and whatever the cost is for the ultrasound. </p>
<p>It’s been a year and half since I’ve done either. Guess I need to make that phone call myself. Thanks for the reminder.</p>
<p>The responses beg the question…why, once one is determined to have dense tissue, does one even go through any form of regular mammogram and not straight to an ultra sound? Does the radiologist need the regular mammogram images in order to make sense of an ultrasound image?</p>
<p>^^^ I don’t know the reasons why but I do know that I had to have the mammogram first. On the other hand, my daughter had a small lump in her breast. The doctor determined through a physical exam that it was nothing to worry about but insisted that she follow-up with an ultrasound as an abundance of caution. She had an ultrasound of the one breast only - no mammogram first. She was told all was well during the ultrasound by the radiologist and then the doctor followed up within a few hours also.</p>
<p>I can’t believe this thread has appeared overnight, as I was going to post a very similar question today myself! Week before last, I had my first 3D mammo (I’ve had several “regular” ones in past years). Last week, the breast center called to say one side was showing as dense (the term she used was “fibro-glandular density”) and they wanted to re-do it with ultrasound. The next day, the nurse from my OB’s office called to leave the same message. Anyway, the next visit is Dec. 4th. After googling, it appears that possibly half of all women have dense tissue, so I am not inclined to freak out about this, plus no history of breast cancer in my family at all. </p>
<p>I would like to know what the difference is in a regular mammo (where you are standing up with the “girl” flopped up onto the machine) versus an ultrasound. Is it done the same way, just a different machine? </p>
<p>Here’s some information on breast ultasonography.
<a href=“Breast Ultrasound”>http://www.radiologyinfo.org/en/info.cfm?pg=breastus</a></p>
<p>I have had ultrasound for the past few years on one breast only immediately following my mammo, same day as apparently more dense than the other My gynecologist writes a prescription for both. This year I had to pay up front and get reimbursed for the sono, mammagrams 100% covered. To one of the above poster, I think under the Affordable Care Act, insurance companies are required to cover mammographies. I’ve always been 100% covered. </p>
<p>I have always had to have to follow up ultrasound, too, and have wondered why not straight to the ultrasound. At first I would get the mammogram, then get called back a few days later. A letter, a series of phone calls, they pursued me. Then we moved and I would get the mammogram, and they would do the follow up on the spot. That was great! Now I guess my insurance has changed and I get the follow up letter and get called in a second time. </p>
<p>One breast reads fine, one is dense. I do have a family history, so I stay on top of it. </p>
<p>Add me to the list of those of us with dense breasts. I opted to have the follow-up ultrasound 2 years ago, and it was negative. When I had my mammogram last year, I chose not to do the ultrasound. I’m due for my mammogram soon, and I’m not sure what I’ll do about the ultrasound. My insurance pays 100% for the mammogram, but not for the ultrasound.</p>
<p>Add me to the dense breast club. I did the 3d last year where they saw calcifications. I redid the scan where they confirmed it was calcifications that they could just really see now and they want me to go in every 6 months. Calcifications do not turn into breast cancer. It really put me into a tailspin and put me in a real tizzy last December. I decided not to do the 6 month follow up, but will do it reluctantly at 1 year and know that ahead of time that I’ll have to go through it again. </p>
<p>Every time I scroll past this thread title I think it’s a response to the Barbie CS book bust! =)) </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This article may be of interest:
<a href=“The Case Against Early Cancer Detection | FiveThirtyEight”>http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-case-against-early-cancer-detection/</a></p>
<p>I have dense tissue and haven’t even heard of an ultrasound. They want me to go for MRIs because of high risk factors (family history). I had one and hated it. It was very loud and uncomfortable. This year I tried something new, an MBI. They said it’s not as effective as an MRI, but a step up from a regular mammogram. Has anyone else had one?</p>
<p><a href=“Molecular breast imaging - PMC”>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2748346/</a></p>
<p>eyeamamon
</p>
<p>You probably know this but "clarification " about “classifications”-my friend had biopsy which confirmed large suspicious areas, of irregularly formed calcifications. Eyeamamon glad you fall in the the 98% benign category !
But, for others -
From web md </p>
<p>‘‘Benign’’ calcifications are considered harmless. No further evaluation or treatment is needed.</p>
<p>‘‘Probably benign’’ calcifications have a less than 2% risk of being cancer. In other words, more than 98% of the time “probably benign” calcifications are not cancer. Typically, they will be monitored every six months for at least one year. After a year of follow-up, and assuming no new changes are found, your doctor will recommend you have a routine mammogram once a year.</p>
<p>‘‘Suspicious’’ calcifications may be benign or an early sign of cancer; therefore, your doctor may recommend you have a biopsy. During a biopsy, a small amount of breast tissue containing the calcification is removed and sent to a laboratory to be examined for cancer cells. If cancer is present, treatment may consist of surgery to remove the cancerous breast, radiation, and/or chemotherapy to kill any remaining cancer cells.</p>
<p>I spoke with the radiology office today. A digital/CAD mammogram is done first and then an ultrasound as a follow up if there is dense tissue. The tests are not either/ or but complimentary. Each ‘looks’ at things a bit differently. According to the insurance coordinator, all their contracted plans cover the follow up ultrasounds under the preventative benefit. But on the chance that my policy does not, the contacted rate is $106. So, I’ll be going ahead with the ultrasound. They use the SOMA-V-ABUS (automatic breast ultrasound) unit which they just bought. Hence, the letter to follow up test this year and not last. </p>
<p>MRI are only done if something is found, and not as a standard preventative screening.</p>
<p>My mother got invasive breast cancer when I was 37 and I started having mammograms then. I’m 51 now. They have always said I had dense breasts and now it is state law to notify patients of such. I have had call backs, extra mammograms or ultrasounds, ~65% of the time. It is horribly anxiety producing for me and I also worry that I’ve increased my risk even more with all the extra radiation.</p>
<p>For someone likely to have callbacks I highly recommend getting your mammograms done at a center where the radiologist reads them right then and does extra pictures, tests, etc. immediately. This is SO much better than the typical wait for “bad” letter, call, schedule, wait more.</p>
<p>My ultrasounds were not covered under preventive so the costs was on me since the deductible wasn’t met. Same situation in the years where I had mammograms every 6 months, because then they move from screening to diagnostic.</p>
<p>How do you know if a place has the instant read? When I went back the second time they had me wait for results, the first time they notified my doctor who notified me. I agree that it’s really anxiety producing. I got so nervous for the call back I popped xanax like pez to just get there. It’s why I’m not going so much, the side effects of the anxiety really aren’t good for me.</p>
<p>And Xanax can cause rebound anxiety which compounds matters. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I know this is a serious topic…but everytime I look at this thread, i think the girls aren’t very smart (that kind of “dense”).</p>
<p>That being said…I would do the extra test. I have fibroids, and this caused all kinds of angst when I had my baseline mammogram. Turned out it was nothing…but I had a biopsy to prove it was nothing. Not needed since because they have that baseline information now.</p>