I apologize if my response was unclear as I was not writing him off but the choices given & there rate of success as I understood them is what my feelings were based on. All I was trying to say is I would not do a 25% survival surgery before knowing what & where this thing was.
I suppose I thought they did a some imaging to see extent before the surgery & I'm now questioning why they did surgery in the first place if they went in blind on possible cancer.
First thing should be imaging so you have an idea what you are going into. 2nd would be to try to get a biopsy & if its appearing on the skin they could have tested that without surgery.
The thing I looked up is not cancer but it can get be a problem depending on where it grows into. They even mentioned that sometimes these things shrink on there own.
So it would be good to try to know what MC is dealing with & surgery again was said to be 25% survival so all other means of id should have been given & I can't even fathom why they did surgery without imaging or biopsy as its not good to do it when you don't know anything about its extent or what it is as it can cause it to break off & make matters worse.
I am not a Oncologist or surgeon as most of us are not but I spoke from my experience & tried to say everything before & surgery last... especially in light of the first & the surgeons comments about any additional surgery. Why they did surgery in the first place I don;t know all the facts or details but from what I have read I am questioning that decision.