[What tools should be used for follow-up post occupational exposure? What should be the frequency?]

As long as the value of screening for cancers related to asbestos is not proven in the population at risk, the medical benefits of follow-up post-professional exposure remain uncertain and the only justification is to answer the questions of anxious retired workers concerning the consequences of their past-exposure and to provide compensation for any abnormalities that are demonstrated. In this country, to answer the questions posed in the title of this contribution in the case of pathologies related to asbestos, it is necessary, after verifying the fact and the level of exposure, to identify the pleural or pulmonary fibrosis and, above all, the pleural plaques, which constitute the essential lesions currently screened for. Thoracic CT scanning without contrast is the examination of choice to achieve this objective. There are, however, two significant problems. On one hand there is a high incidence of pulmonary micronodules, the necessary surveillance of which requires subsequent scans, leading to increased irradiation and anxiety. On the other hand the diagnostic uncertainty concerning discrete lesions is a source of confusion for the persons followed-up. There are, at present, neither scientific criteria to determine the optimum frequency of examination nor any arguments for replacing the pragmatic proposals of the consensus conference of 1999. It is important, therefore, to provide a medical assessment appropriate to the symptoms and anxiety expressed by a person previously exposed to asbestos. Overall it is necessary to question the benefit to the exposed person, in terms of quality of life, of a regular search for lesions that would usually be asymptomatic if not identified. Would it not be more judicious and more equitable to compensate persons whose past-exposure is sufficient to increase significantly their risk of cancer independently of the presence of benign abnormalities.