OBJECTIVE: aim was to obtain elements for a differential diagnosis between post-radiation @entity82 and @entity41 or local relapse in @entity5 through detection of presence/absence of intralesional blood flow. Transrectal ultrasound and color Doppler were compared. METHODS: 43 @entity1 underwent transrectal ultrasound sonography and color Doppler before and after therapy to assess intralesional blood flow and flow pattern (spotty and linear signals). All diagnostic imaging results were compared to histological analysis. Specificity was submitted to statistical analysis using McNemar test. RESULTS: before therapy 34 lesions (79%) showed color signal; no signal in 9 (21%), which were excluded from our analysis. Eighteen of the 34 @entity1 considered, presented complete response to therapy, 14 partial response and two no response. After therapy, signal disappeared in 17 @entity1 (94%); one false-positive (6%) presented spotty signals; 16 of 34 @entity1 presented changed color signal. Color Doppler showed higher specificity than grey scale transrectal ultrasound in the differentiation of @entity82 from @entity5 . Response was confirmed by histological examination, considered gold standard. McNemar test demonstrated the significance of color Doppler (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: color Doppler considerably increases transrectal ultrasound specificity in differentiating @entity5 relapse from @entity5 .

Transrectal ultrasound color Doppler in the evaluation of recurrence of XXXX .

@entity5 :: ('MESH:D009369', 'Disease') :: ['tumor', 'anal canal cancer', 'fibrosis in anal canal cancer'] @entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients'] @entity82 :: ('MESH:D005355', 'Disease') :: ['fibrosis'] @entity41 :: ('MESH:D018365', 'Disease') :: ['residual tumor']
@entity5 :: (MESH:D009369,Disease) :: ['anal canal cancer']
