Objective Unplanned resection of a sarcoma is often chosen in the early phase by general physicians without any imaging scrutiny. The present study aimed to highlight the clinical problems associated with unplanned resection of sarcomas. Methods Thirty-eight patients who underwent unplanned resection of a sarcoma and additional treatment were examined. The definite histological grading was high in 31 patients and low in 7 patients. Results The tumors were located in the depth of the subfascia in 13 patients. The maximal tumor sizes exceeded 5 cm in 16 patients. Preoperative MRI was only performed in six patients. The previous surgical margins were intralesional in 20 patients and marginal in 18 patients. Inappropriate transverse skin incisions were found in 21 patients. Extensive hematoma at the initial surgical site was seen in five patients. Thirty-three patients accepted additional wide resection due to the insufficient removal of malignancy. During an average follow-up of 42.7 months, seven patients died of lung and brain metastases. Conclusions On excision of any soft tissue tumor, surgeons should be aware of the potential risk for erroneous management of malignancy. If not, careless surgery may render the treatment protocol complicated and require excessive additional tissue resection with poor function and prognosis. Appropriate salvage treatment may have a significant role to play after unplanned resection of the sarcoma.

The aim of the current study was to evaluate the limitations of 2‑deoxy‑2‑F18‑fluoro‑D‑glucose positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography (FDG‑PET/CT) when monitoring soft tissue tumors. The diagnostic criteria of malignancy was defined as the tumor having a maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) ≥2.0 and a maximum diameter ≥5 cm as measured using FDG‑PET/CT. One-hundred-and-thirteen patients, that were either included in the criteria or not, were compared. In addition, the values of SUVmax of the primary tumor and relapse in 12 patients were evaluated. The Kaplan‑Meier analysis demonstrated that patients with tumors measuring ≥5 cm size and ≥2.0 SUVmax were associated with a worse survival rate. Among the 12 patients with relapse, statistical significances were detected in the tumor diameters, however, not in the SUVmax values. Thus, the criteria identified patients that were associated with a poor prognosis, and the SUVmax of distant metastases and local recurrences were identified to be significantly affected by tumor size.