My doctor and the dermatology specialist are concerned about a mole I started growing 18months ago. They wanted to do a biopsy (forming a scar 10mm across), but I said no as they would be taking half my mole and half the skin next to it. My argument is that they take the whole mole and perhaps the one next to it, do the test to find out if its a BCC, but not have to the remove the affected moles at a latter date. I don't care if the scar is 10mm or 40mm, which is the area under debate, I won't mourn my lost moles.

They are happy to re-check in 4 to 6 weeks depending on itch and bleeding, then remove all if needed. But the pressure was horrendous and I don't feel I was being unreasonable. I was happy for the whole lot to be removed there and then or as soo as was convenient. I just don't understand the point of partial removal when talking about a mole (or two in my case).

1 Reply

  • Hi Nomi,

    I had a bcc removed from my abdomen some years ago. The mole was fairly small, and was completely removed via excisional biopsy along with some of the surrounding tissue.

    This year my hubby had 2 larger moles removed. They weren't both removed all at once as his doctor wasn't sure whether or not they were cancerous. I think his doctor was trying to minimize discomfort and avoid any unnecessary scarring.

    You might want to speak with your doctors again as to why they are only considering partial removal. It sounds like they have not properly explained the reasons for their decision.


You may also like...