1. Community
  2. Women's health
  3. Lichen Sclerosus

Dermatology appointment

Posted , 9 users are following.

g30rg313
g30rg313

I have been put on the waiting list to see a dermatologist, they will, of course, be doing a biopsy at this appointment.  My worry is, that since my appointment will not be for at least another twelve weeks, I will have healed enough with using my Dermovate that there will be no sore patches for them to take a biopsy of.  I don't really want to stop using the cream as having a flare up is so distressing and painful, this is the last thing I want to have again. But, would it be better if I did have a flare up so that they have something to take a biopsy of?

0 likes, 39 replies

39 Replies

Prev
  • suzanne00
    suzanne00 g30rg313

    Posted

    I've read that even if the biopsies are negative, doctors are encouraged to diagnose LS and treat it if it looks like LS.  If they diagnose it visually anyway, why do the biopsy (unless it definitely looks like cancer), right? Biopsies are not always positive in LS.  Both my practitioners thought that I would get a biopsy, but I resisted and said that I would feel that I couldn't continue with them if treatment was contingent on a biopsy.  They both stated that they could do a clinical diagnosis after I said that.  Hmmmm... (wish they said that before I had to say that I would leave if they insisted on a biopsy).  My concern is that likely is more about protecting their liability, documenting and supporting their treatment inteventions than about our welfare.  I did not want a biopsy because the tissues are already inflammed, thinning, and traumatized.  Taking a chunk out of such delicate, tender, and upset tissues does not make good sense to me.  I and my practitioners will watch and make sure to notice any changes that could indicate malignacy, but I don't expect that to occur and I do take good care of my health.  It does make sense to have input into our healthcare and see our doctors as co-adventurers, but not as gods.  They're often trying to figure it all out, too.  I waited several months for treatment because I thought that I had to have a biopsy and didn't want one.  I regret that I didn't take charge of my healthcare sooner by gathering a team around me that support the reasonable decision not to biopsy if there is no evidence of malignacy.  
    • hanny32508
      hanny32508 suzanne00

      Posted

      I like the way you put it:doctors as co-adventurers, not gods.

      When an honest doctor tells you: We know so little. We all need to be on board, don't we. Patient and doctor need to work together for the best result known at this moment in time. 

    • marey
      marey hanny32508

      Posted

      yes that's how i see it...admissions of uncertainty are appropriate....plus the expert patient tendency accomodates partnering with medical staff and accumulations of knowledge from different sources can be shared along the journey...plus we are family on here....whatever the ups and downs...we'll just hang out for each other!
  • kate207
    kate207 g30rg313

    Posted

    In my opinion (and I know everyone's different) I think you should have a biopsy if offered it, just to rule out anything more sinister and put your mind at rest. When I had mine I was very sore and inflamed, and the gynacologist was worried it was VIN.  Because I was so sore so he did it under general anasthetic  - that gave him a good chance to give me a really good examination without having to worry about hurting me. It came back as LS but with a high level of thrush as a contributing factor, which was surprising to me, but explained why the dermovate alone wasn't working. The procedure was covered by my health insurance and I was in and out of the hospital in about six hours.
    • Morrell1951
      Morrell1951 kate207

      Posted

      I believe this complication with thrush is more common than we realize. It's a major factor in my LS, over decades. And it's a chicken-egg relationship.
    • suzanne00
      suzanne00 Morrell1951

      Posted

      It would be interesting to start a discussion thread inquiring about everyone's experiences with vaginal yeast infections.  I know that some people are likely asymptomatic and may not know that they are carrying a heavy yeast inbalance, but I wonder whether a lot of us have noticed a connection between thrush and LS.  In fact, I really wonder if our bodies' attempts to control and attack the yeast are what may be causing the LS.  Any thoughts on this?
    • Morrell1951
      Morrell1951 suzanne00

      Posted

      Well, I only had the one yeast infection six months ago, after trying to have sex. Then last week after an upsetting day and a dose of sugar (while starting up the premarin cream briefly). So myself I don't see chronic candidiasis as a cause of LS – I've heard plenty about that and realize many people make a huge lifestyle change to try to rid themselves of it. I'm not much interested in that familiar vein. I do think it's a circular flare thing, though. I think we already have a thrush thread going.
    • suzanne00
      suzanne00 Morrell1951

      Posted

      Yeah, I don't think that I was even thinking of chronic candidiasis.  The issue that I was thinking about was that there can be a trigger for the LS, including infections that set off the attack in the beginning.  So many people have talked about thrush.  If it flares easily, I wonder why.  I was told a couple of years ago that yeast turned up on my pap test (I know that some is always there, but this must have been more for them to report that).  I haven't been symptomatic--so must have been subclinical. Then this LS occurs.  Did not know that there was a previous thrush discussion.  I'll check it out.  
    • Morrell1951
      Morrell1951 suzanne00

      Posted

      I think the strongest theory is that LS is really several different diseases. Mine appeared at age 22 (or earlier). My mother talks about bad diaper rash, which could have been thrush, or psoriasis, or childhood LS.

      Now that the antifungal cream has cleared up my yeast infection, the LS is back to being the best ever. Interesting that my perineum went white during the bout and so quickly retured to pink.

       

    • kate207
      kate207 Morrell1951

      Posted

      I never ever had a problem with yeast until after the LS was established, and then I only had problems with it externally on the damaged vuval skin, not vaginally.  I'm happy to go along with my dermatologist's opinion that what would be a perfectly acceptable level on healthy skin is not tolerated by weakened areas - in other words it's not that the yeast levels have increased, its the affect of it on the LS damaged skin that's significant.
    • Morrell1951
      Morrell1951 kate207

      Posted

      I was thinking about this more today. I agree that LS comes first. A pharmacist once told me that yeast is like weeds growing in 'disturbed soil' on the roadside. I read an article about LS recently where yeast was referred to as a 'secondary infection'.
  • g30rg313
    g30rg313

    Posted

    Just to let everyone know I finally got my dermatology appointment through.  Will be going to see dermatologist in around three weeks smile
    • marey
      marey g30rg313

      Posted

      Thanks g...been wondering about how you were. Even sent you a pm !

      Might you be doing the fast around now? Tbf gives more info on sha's thread. biopsy today.

      GOOD LUCK with the dermatologist. 

Back to top
Prev

Report or request deletion

Thanks for your help!

We want the community to be a useful resource for our users but it is important to remember that the community are not moderated or reviewed by doctors and so you should not rely on opinions or advice given by other users in respect of any healthcare matters. Always speak to your doctor before acting and in cases of emergency seek appropriate medical assistance immediately. Use of the community is subject to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy and steps will be taken to remove posts identified as being in breach of those terms.