Abstract
To elucidate whether (1) a posterior axillary boost (PAB) field is an optimal method to target axillary lymph nodes (LNs); and (2) the addition of a PAB increases the incidence of lymphedema, a systematic review was undertaken. A literature search was performed in the PubMed database. A total of 16 studies were evaluated. There were no randomized studies. Seven articles have investigated dosimetric aspects of a PAB. The remaining 9 articles have determined the effect of a PAB field on the risk of lymphedema. Only 2 of 9 articles have prospectively reported the impact of a PAB on the risk of lymphedema development. There are conflicting reports on the necessity of a PAB. The PAB field provides a good coverage of level I/II axillary LNs because these nodes are usually at a greater depth. The main concern regarding a PAB is that it produces a hot spot in the anterior region of the axilla. Planning studies optimized a traditional PAB field. Prospective studies and the vast majority of retrospective studies have reported the use of a PAB field does not result in increasing the risk of lymphedema development over supraclavicular-only field. The controversies in the incidence of lymphedema suggest that field design may be more important than field arrangement. A key factor regarding the use of a PAB is the depth of axillary LNs. The PAB field should not be used unless there is an absolute indication for its application. Clinicians should weigh lymphedema risk in individual patients against the limited benefit of a PAB, in particular after axillary dissection. The testing of the inclusion of upper arm lymphatics in the regional LN irradiation target volume, and universal methodology measuring lymphedema are all areas for possible future studies.