Confusing biopsy result

Hi, not sure where I should post this really, so sorry if it’s in the wrong place. I found a lump about 6 weeks ago and checked with my GP who said I would be referred to the local breast clinic. I informed him that I was already under them as both my mum and paternal grandmother were diagnosed with breast cancer at 49, I am 45. A week later I went to the clinic where the lump didn’t feel quite so obvious. I must add I do suffer from very painful lumpy breast for about two weeks of every cycle and they can go up a bra size as well. The Dr said I needed a ultrasound because I had, had a mammogram less than a year ago. The ultrasound showed a 7mm nodule, two core biopsy samples were taken and a titanium marker put in place. A mammogram was taken to see if the marker showed up with the lump as my original yearly mammogram was clear. I was sent home with an appointment for results a week later.
On my return I was told the biopsy was benign and showed normal breast tissue. Obviously I was very pleased, however a this didn’t match the ultrasound which was stated as U4 the lump was also classed mammographically occult. They decided a new biopsy should be
taken to get clarification of what it was. I was ok with this better to be safe etc. I went back two weeks later where the radiographer said my lump was highly suspicious and not a single radiographer in the country would state differently. On the ultrasound the lump was exactly the same, so another two core biopsy a would be taken. This time my breast bled awfully as they inserted the antiseptic. I had about 5 mins if a nurse pressing really hard on my breast very painful! The two samples were taken and again I was told to return in a week for results. This time the radiographer said the samples looked more like they were expecting and he was sure he had got it. A very stressful week later where I have over analysed everything and been utterly useless at work etc etc.
I went for results Friday afternoon I was expecting the worse because they said they would ring if it was benign. The Dr who was different from the man I had seen previously, told be all was well it was benign obviously I was very pleased to say the least. However this is where it gets a bit strange he said it was haematoma. Apparently that’s what the second sample had shown. He said I had no reason to worry it was benign and it shouldn’t be there but it was. I asked if I could have it removed I was told there was no need and he said if I was concerned he would see me in 6 months and if it was bigger they would see about removing it. He would also give me yearly mammograms if that would help me feel better. I explained I was already having those and the lump hadn’t shown on it anyway! I know I am rambling and I should be relieved that it was clear. But I am very confused, if I had been told I had a benign condition or cyst I would feel ok, but i can find nothing on haematomas. They only seem to appear after breast surgery, core biopsies and trauma, I have no trauma except for the core biopsies.
If you have come across anything like this please comment I am really concerned as I don’t feel it was explained properly. I do feel that the Dr hadn’t read my file, paranoid probably, thank you all in-advance and sorry for the long overly complicated post. Max004


I don’t know if this will help but haematoma usually refers to a blood clot which could have occured after the first biopsy or at the time of the second.

They usually resolve over time as they are reabsorbed by the body.

If you are still worried speak to the consultants Secretary.


Hi Curleychris
Thank you for your response, that’s what I thought also. I was am just a little confused that I was told my second biopsy result was a haematoma. I think I may go and see my GP and ask if he can explain. Thank you again

Hi yes I did realise that, that was what a haematoma was. What I don’t understand is how a breast lump can be classified as this after a second biopsy. Thanks for comment though Max004