More than 15% of all soft-tissue tumors arise in the hand. Because of the location of these tumors, even small abnormalities may be alarming to patients on presentation. Although the majority of lesions are benign and can be diagnosed solely by history and physical examination, additional imaging workup may be required to confirm a diagnosis or define anatomic extent of involvement. This paper aims to review the basic epidemiology, clinical presentation, imaging findings, and treatment options of the more common soft-tissue tumors of the hand.

Limb salvage surgeries utilizing endoprostheses and allografts are performed for a variety of oncologic conditions. These reconstructions can fail and require revision for many reasons, which are outlined and classified into mechanical failures (soft tissue failures, aseptic loosening, structural failure), non-mechanical failures (infection, tumor progression), and pediatric failures (physeal arrest, growth dysplasia). Distinct radiologic and clinical findings define specific failure subtypes but are sparsely illustrated in the radiology literature. Specifically, an understanding of the organizational structure of the failure modes can direct radiologists’ search for post-reconstruction complications, enhance an appreciation of their prognostic significance, and facilitate research by standardizing the language and conceptual framework around outcomes. The purpose of this review is to highlight the key radiologic findings and imaging studies of each failure mode in orthopedic oncologic reconstructive surgery in the context of risk factors, failure rates, prognosis and survival statistics, and clinical decision-making regarding chemotherapy, radiation, and revision surgery.

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for making the diagnosis of subscapularis tears presents wide variation in the literature and there are few prospective studies. OBJECTIVE: To compare the findings from MRI and arthroscopy for diagnosing subscapularis tears. DESIGN AND SETTING: Diagnostic test study performed in a tertiary care hospital. METHODS: We included patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and who had firstly undergone high magnetic field MRI without contrast. The images were independently evaluated by a shoulder surgeon and two musculoskeletal radiologists. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, accuracy and inter and intra-observer agreement were calculated. RESULTS: MRIs on 200 shoulders were evaluated. The incidence of subscapularis tears was 69.5% (41.5% partial and 28.0% full-thickness). The inter and intra-observer agreement was moderate for detection of subscapularis tears. The shoulder surgeon presented sensitivity of 51.1% to 59.0% and specificity of 91.7% to 94.4%. The radiologists showed sensitivity of 83.5% to 87.1% and specificity of 41% to 45.9%. Accuracy ranged from 60.5% to 73.0%. CONCLUSION: The 1.5-T MRIs without contrast showed mean sensitivity of 70.2% and mean specificity of 61.9% for detection of subscapularis tears. Sensitivity was higher for the musculoskeletal radiologists, while specificity was higher for the shoulder surgeon. The mean accuracy was 67.6%, i.e. lower than that of rotator cuff tears overall.

Desmoid tumors are rare, locally invasive soft-tissue tumors with unpredictable clinical behavior. Imaging plays a crucial role in their diagnosis, measurement of disease burden, and assessment of treatment response. However, desmoid tumors’ unique imaging features present challenges to conventional imaging metrics. The heterogeneous nature of these tumors, with a variable composition (fibrous, myxoid, or cellular), complicates accurate delineation of tumor boundaries and volumetric assessment. Furthermore, desmoid tumors can demonstrate prolonged stability or spontaneous regression, and biologic quiescence is often manifested by collagenization rather than bulk size reduction, making traditional size-based response criteria, such as Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), suboptimal. To overcome these limitations, advanced imaging techniques offer promising opportunities. Functional and parametric imaging methods, such as diffusion-weighted MRI, dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, and T2 relaxometry, can provide insights into tumor cellularity and maturation. Radiomics and artificial intelligence approaches may enhance quantitative analysis by extracting and correlating complex imaging features with biological behavior. Moreover, imaging biomarkers could facilitate earlier detection of treatment efficacy or resistance, enabling tailored therapy. By integrating advanced imaging into clinical practice, it may be possible to refine the evaluation of disease burden and treatment response, ultimately improving the management and outcomes of patients with desmoid tumors.

➢ In soft-tissue sarcomas (STSs), the use of positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) through a standardized uptake value reduction rate correlates well with histopathological response to neoadjuvant treatment and survival. ➢ PET-CT has shown a better sensitivity to diagnose systemic involvement compared with magnetic resonance imaging and CT; therefore, it has an important role in detecting recurrent systemic disease. However, delaying the use of PET-CT scan, to differentiate tumor recurrence from benign fluorodeoxyglucose uptake changes after surgical treatment and radiotherapy, is essential. ➢ PET-CT limitations such as difficult differentiation between benign inflammatory and malignant processes, inefficient discrimination between benign soft-tissue tumors and STSs, and low sensitivity when evaluating small pulmonary metastases must be of special consideration.

Multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTBs) facilitate decision-making among subspecialists in the care of oncology patients, but the mechanisms by which they enhance outcomes remain incompletely understood. Our aim was to measure the agreement between sarcoma MTBs and radiology reports’ disease assessment and management recommendations. This single-center IRB-approved retrospective study evaluated cases presented at a weekly sarcoma MTB from 1 August 2020 to 31 July 2021. Cases without clinical notes, imaging studies, or radiology reports were excluded. The data collected included the patient’s clinical status at the time of the MTB, the treatment response assessment by the MTB and radiologists (stable disease; partial response; complete response; progressive disease/recurrence), and the recommendations of the radiology reports and of the MTB. The agreement between the initial radiologist review and MTB on disease assessment and recommendations was analyzed using kappa statistics. In total, 283 cases met the inclusion criteria. Radiology reports provided recommendations in 34.3% of cases, which were adhered to by the ordering providers in 73.2% of cases. The agreement between MTBs and radiology reports was moderate in disease assessment (86.2% agreement; κ = 0.78; p < 0.0001) and negligible in recommendations (36% agreement; κ = 0.18; p < 0.0001). Radiologists were more likely to assign progressive disease/recurrence than MTBs (54.4% vs. 44.4%; p < 0.001) and to recommend short-term imaging follow-up more commonly than MTBs (46.4% vs. 21.7%; p < 0.001). At a tertiary care center, radiologists’ isolated interpretations of imaging findings and management recommendations frequently differ from the MTB’s consensus, reflecting the value of multidisciplinary discussions incorporating the patient’s clinical status and the available treatment options into the final radiographic assessment.