Even though I had all the "symptoms" for anal cancer, about a year ago , lasting for appx 6 mos, (dk red blood, major-minor amounts, ribbon stools and always feeling like I had to go regardless)....They've miraculously gone away...As has my "rai" sexual practices as well. (yes I am hiv )

now after a "pap smear" came back as carcinoma in-situ, they want to perform a anal biopsy under general anethesia with all the associative drawbacks (major 2-3 week pain residue, potential for inconclusiveness and surgeon "resident" excision error/aggresivness).

My question, since the "symptoms" have literally dissappeared for over 6 months now (although I do get "residual" trace blood if "scrapey/rough" stools are passed).........
The fact that "pap smears" are notorious for being incorrect as regards to "specificity" ..........
And that a veterans hospital resident desirous of "excision" time/experience will be doing the "cutting" ......
(they will not only perform surveillance biopsies (6) pieces of rectal tissue around the "circumference" but also......
Are planning to excise any/all "lesions" plus their margins that are "small" enough to accept such invasive action....

Pls advise, as these are valid, objective concerns I have concerning potential drawbacks, discomfort, doctor "competence" and morbidity...Especially with regards to "pap" smear specificity error.

Why incur invasive action when no symptoms remain or linger, especially in light of all the haphazardly generated "pap" smear inclusivities.

There's only so much "real estate" to work with down there...

Thankyou.