RESUMO
PURPOSE: According to the S-3 guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer, only palpation and mammography are mandatory follow-up examinations. Ultrasonography is only mentioned as an optional technique. Aiming to elucidate the diagnostic yield for detecting recurrent disease after breast-preserving therapy (BPT) and radiation treatment, we analysed the sensitivity of palpation, mammography, ultrasonography, and combinations of these methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over a period of 12 years, 27 suspicious lesions in patients status post BPT and radiation therapy were biopsied (histologic results: 16 benign lesions: 59.3 %, 11 malignant lesions: 40.7 %). Prior to biopsy, the benign or malignant character of each lesion was predicted by palpation, mammography and ultrasonography (BIRADS). Sensitivity, specifity, positive predictive value (ppv), negative predictive value (npv), and efficiency were calculated from a contingency table. RESULTS: For lesions status post BPT and radiation treatment, palpation had a sensitivity of 72.7 % and was 25 % specific. For mammography, the respective values were 36.4 % and 87.5 %, and for ultrasonography 90.9 % and 68.8 %. Palpation and mammography combined were 81.8 % sensitive and had a specificity of 6.2 %. The computed sensitivity for the 3 methods applied together was 100 %. Adding ultrasonography to palpation and mammography therefore increases sensitivity by 18.2 %. CONCLUSION: For diagnosing recurrent disease in patients status post BPT and radiation therapy, ultrasonography is superior to palpation and/or mammography and should become an obligatory follow-up tool. The role of mammographic follow-up appears overrated and the role of ultrasonographic assessment underrated. The S-3 guidelines will need to be changed accordingly.
