Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation 36 (2017) 233–243

Available online at

ScienceDirect
www.sciencedirect.com

Recent advance

Soft tissue sarcomas of the forearm, wrist and hand

Tumeurs malignes des parties molles de l’avant-bras, du poignet et de la main

C. Lazerges
Chirurgie de la main et du membre supérieur, chirurgie des nerfs périphériques, hôpital Lapeyronie, CHRU de Montpellier, 191, avenue du
Doyen-Gaston-Giraud, 34295 Montpellier cedex 5, France

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: Soft tissue sarcoma of the forearm, wrist and hand are rare. Their benign appearance leads often to
Received 26 September 2016 primary inadequate treatment. Due to the complex anatomy of the hand and forearm, they are
Received in revised form 4 December 2016 challenging to treat. The two goals are to obtain wide resection of the primary tumor while preserving
Accepted 22 December 2016
function. Limb-sparing surgery is now the cornerstone for the treatment of most sarcomas of the
Available online 16 June 2017
forearm, hand and wrist. To achieve optimal oncological and functional outcomes, the surgical excision
should be associated with early reconstructive procedures and a multidisciplinary meeting to define the
Keywords:
treatment strategy including adjuvant medical treatments. This article outlines the current principles
Soft tissue sarcoma
Wrist
and presents the results of the treatment of soft tissue sarcomas with emphasis on to particularities
Hand related to their forearm, wrist and hand location.
C 2017 SFCM. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Limb-sparing surgery
Reconstructive surgery

R É S U M É

Mots clés : Les tumeurs malignes des parties molles de l’avant-bras, du poignet et de la main sont des tumeurs rares,
Sarcome tissus mous souvent d’apparence bénigne et régulièrement initialement négligées. De par la complexité de
Main l’anatomie de la main et de l’avant-bras, leur prise en charge est difficile et représente un vrai challenge
Poignet
thérapeutique. L’objectif à atteindre est de concilier à la fois une exigence carcinologique et une exigence
Chirurgie conservatrice
Chirurgie reconstructrice
fonctionnelle d’importance majeure à l’avant-bras, au poignet et à la main. La chirurgie d’exérèse
conservatrice est aujourd’hui la pierre angulaire du traitement de la plupart des sarcomes à l’avant-bras,
au poignet et à la main. Pour permettre un résultat carcinologique et fonctionnel optimal, cette exérèse
chirurgicale doit être associée à une chirurgie reconstructrice précoce et à une prise en charge
multidisciplinaire, afin de définir un projet thérapeutique global incluant les traitements médicaux
adjuvants. Cet article précise les principes actuels et les résultats de prise en charge des tumeurs
malignes des parties molles en insistant sur les aspects spécifiques des localisations à l’avant-bras, au
poignet et à la main.
C 2017 SFCM. Publié par Elsevier Masson SAS. Tous droits réservés.

1. Introduction
Malignant tumors of the soft tissues, or soft tissue sarcomas
(STS), are rare malignant tumors. They make up less than 1% of
newly diagnosed cancers each year [1]. Their incidence is 2–3 cases
per 100,000 [2] and there are an estimated 3000 to 4000 new cases
each year in France [3,4]. About 60% of these STS develop in the
limbs, of which 15% to 25% affect the upper limb and only 5% to 10%
E-mail address: c-lazerges@chu-montpellier.fr
affect the hand or wrist [5–7]. STS are histologically heteroge-
neous, with about 50 different histological kinds described [8]. In
the upper limb, the most common STS are synovial sarcomas,
epithelioid sarcomas and malignant histiocytofibromas [5,9]
(Table 1).
These tumors in the forearm, wrist and hand are challenging to
treat. Optimal treatment for the cancer should be balanced with
minimal impact on function.
Since the end of the 1970s, radical treatment by amputation is
no longer the reference surgical treatment for these lesions
[10,11]. Limb-sparing excision and reconstructive surgery are now

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hansur.2016.12.010
2468-1229/
C 2017 SFCM. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
234 C. Lazerges / Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation 36 (2017) 233–243
Table 1
The most common histological types of soft tissue sarcomas in the hand, wrist and
forearm.
Malignant histiocytofibroma (undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma)
Synovial sarcoma
Epithelioid sarcoma
Clear-cell sarcoma
Fibrosarcoma
Leiomyosarcoma
Liposarcoma
Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor
Dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans
Myxoinflammatory fibroblastic sarcoma
used in the hand and wrist [12–14]. To achieve the best possible
functional and cancer-related outcomes, this surgical excision
must be combined with early reconstructive surgery and
multidisciplinary care, in order to define the overall treatment
plan including adjuvant medical treatments (chemotherapy and
radiation therapy). The current principles of the various steps of
the care of these STS are presented in succession, with specific
features related to the forearm, hand and wrist.
2. Diagnosis
The clinical presentation of STS is often misleading and can
appear trivial [15]. In most cases, a subcutaneous mass is discovered
by chance, sometimes during the final healing phases of an injury; it
is often painless and without associated symptoms. In this location,
the tumors are usually small – less than 4 cm – in size [5]. The
chronicity of the mass is not evidence of its benign nature and rapid
progression is more suggestive a high-grade tumor. It is important
to remember that in the hand and wrist, there are more benign than
malignant tumors. However, any atypical ‘‘suspicious’’ mass must
receive comprehensive care, including a full clinical examination
and imaging work-up. If malignancy is still suspected after this
assessment, a primary biopsy is recommended.
The clinical examination must qualify the mass (size, adhesion,
hardness, cutaneous invasion, etc.), evaluate the local consequen-
ces (functional, vascular, neurological) and in general, palpate the
lymph nodes (certain tumors target the lymph nodes: epithelioid
sarcomas, clear-cell sarcomas, synovial sarcomas, rhabdomyosar-
coma) and look for familial disease that is often associated with a
tumor (e.g. malignant tumor of the peripheral nerve sheaths and
type I neurofibromatosis, Li-Fraumeni syndrome, etc.) or even
exposure to carcinogens (herbicides, pesticides, radiation) [15].
The imaging work-up must include standard X-ray views to rule
out bone tumors or invasion of neighboring bones.
Ultrasound imaging, which is commonly available and non-
irradiating, now has very extensive indications for the assessment
of forearm, wrist and hand masses. While ultrasonography only
amounts to a scout scan, it makes it possible to evaluate the liquid
or solid, homogeneous or heterogeneous, superficial or deep
nature of the mass. When correlated with the clinical findings, it is
often able to confirm the benign nature of most suspicious masses
in these locations. If the results of US are atypical, not well
correlated with the clinical findings and do not allow malignancy
to be ruled out, MRI is required before any treatment is initiated.
Ultrasonography is also indicated in the supplemental assessment
of STS to look for associated adenopathy.
MRI is now the gold standard examination for STS. The MRI must
be performed before any biopsy is done [15] and consists of several
T1- and T2-weighted sequences, with and without contrast. In each
sequence, orthogonal planes [16] (ideally with an axial plane) must
be visible to allow better surgical targeting of the tumor margins
and anatomical structures and to facilitate preoperative planning of
the tumor excision margins [17]. While MRI often orients
the diagnosis [18], it has no certitude and cannot substitute for a
biopsy.
Local CT scan of the STS region is only relevant if MRI cannot be
performed, or if bone invasion is present.
Chest and abdomen/pelvis CT with contrast is the gold standard
examination for disease staging. Metastasis typically impacts the
lungs, infrequently the soft tissues or abdomen in certain
histological STS types (myxoid liposarcoma, clear-cell sarcoma)
and even more rarely the lymph nodes (clear-cell sarcoma,
epithelioid sarcoma, synovial sarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, angio-
sarcoma). In certain histological STS types, a positron emission
tomography (PET) scan, which has growing indications for STS
[19–21], can be proposed in the context of disease staging or of
recurrences. However, this examination is not currently recom-
mended in the context of STS care [20].
Lastly, vascular imaging (angiography, CT angiography, MR
angiography) can be indicated, particularly for tumors requiring
complex reconstruction.
Carrying out this complete diagnostic strategy will reduce the
probability of diagnostic errors and inappropriate surgical
treatments. Also, a complete preoperative imaging work-up will
make surgical revisions easier to perform, if needed.
3. Treatment
The treatment principles for STS in the hand, wrist and forearm
are widely described in the literature and do not differ from the
treatment of STS in other locations [3,15,22–24]. There are
however some distinctive features in the hand and wrist.
Because of their small size and more superficial nature, STS of
the hand, wrist and forearm are often operated on right away
without appropriate consideration of the possibility of malignancy,
with or without an incomplete, or even inappropriate preoperative
work-up. This was the case for 38% of patients in the Pradhan study
[25] and 68% of patients in the Bray study [26]. And yet, the impact
of the initial surgery on the risks of residual or recurrent disease it
is widely reported in the literature [27–30], along with the
importance of care in a specialized cancer center [31–33] and a
review of the case in a multidisciplinary meeting (MDM) before
treatment is initiated [22].
3.1. Biopsy
The first phase of care is the biopsy. It will be used to confirm
the benign or malignant nature of the mass, classify the tumor,
plan the type of surgery needed in an optimal manner and in
advanced STS cases, to consider performing neoadjuvant preoper-
ative treatments (chemotherapy, isolated limb perfusion, radio-
therapy) [3].
Not every soft tissue mass in the hand and forearm require a
biopsy. There are many more benign than malignant tumors. If the
clinical and radiological findings are typical (synovial cyst, para-
articular mucoid cyst, superficial lipoma, giant cell tumor of the
synovial sheaths, etc.), an excision biopsy can be performed right
away. However, if there is even the slightest clinical or radiological
suspicion on the potential malignancy of a mass, primary biopsy is
justified. There are no formal clinical or imaging criteria for
malignancy. A long-standing mass is not always benign. Converse-
ly, a rapidly growing mass is not always malignant [15]. However, a
mass that has rapidly grown, of more than 3 cm in the upper limb,
adhering to the superficial or deep layers, that is poorly defined or
subfascial, must be suspected for malignancy. Similarly, on
imaging, a heterogeneous mass that is poorly systematized, that
takes up contrast agent on MRI and is intramuscular, must be
suspected for malignancy. Under these conditions, a primary
biopsy is indicated.
 C. Lazerges / Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation 36 (2017) 233–243 235

Biopsy of hand and forearm tumors may appear simple. Table 2

Classification of the histological grade used by the French Federation of Cancer
However, incorrect positioning of the biopsy tract or an inappro-
Centers Sarcoma Group (FNCLCC).
priate biopsy technique can lead to more aggressive and mutilating
Tumor differentiation
definitive care, or even amputation [15,34]. The proximity of
1 point Sarcoma resembling normal adult tissue
functional anatomical structures magnifies this problem. 2 points Sarcoma with confirmed histological diagnosis
The gold standard technique for an STS biopsy is a percutaneous 3 points Embryonic sarcoma, synovial sarcoma,
core needle biopsy under local anesthesia that is ultrasound-guided epithelioid sarcoma, clear-cell sarcoma, soft tissue
or CT-guided [35,36], unless contraindicated by the radiologist alveolar sarcoma, undifferentiated sarcomas and
sarcomas with uncertain histological type
(most often because of accessibility reasons). The biopsy tract must Mitotic index
be incorporated into the likely surgical excision area for the tumor 1 point 0 to 9 mitotic cells in 10 fields
and must be defined beforehand by the radiologist and surgeon. Its 2 points 10 to 19 mitotic cells in 10 fields
trajectory must be marked. The advantages are the speed with 3 points More than 19 mitotic cells in 10 fields
Tumor necrosis
which it can be performed and reduced contamination of the tissues
1 point No necrosis
around the biopsy tract. The main drawback is the small volume of 2 points Less than 50% necrosis
biopsied tissue, which may limit the histopathological analysis and 3 points More than 50% necrosis
provide incomplete information. Grade 1: 2–3 points Low risk of metastasis
In the forearm, when imaging-guided biopsy cannot be Grade 2: 4–5 points Real risk of metastasis
Grade 3: 6–8 points High risk of metastasis
performed, surgical biopsy is indicated and must comply with
certain rules. It must be performed with a tourniquet without
exsanguination of the limb; only short, longitudinal incisions size and depth of the lesion. The rules for cancer-related surgical
should be made (transverse incisions must be avoided), over the care are widely published and do not differ for the hand and
potential excision path, direct and without detachment. After forearm [3,14,15,22]. In the past, the gold standard treatment for
careful hemostasis, suturing is performed by placing the points STS was amputation. Several studies have found that amputation is
laterally near the incision to limit contamination of adjacent not superior to limb-sparing surgery when the latter can be
tissues; if draining is needed, it must be done in the axis of the limb performed [10].
and as close as possible to the incision [15]. This limb-sparing (conservative) treatment must reconcile two
In the hand, a percutaneous biopsy often cannot be performed fundamental but contradictory principles, which are even more
because of the small size of the tumor. Surgical biopsy is highly strongly interrelated in the hand and forearm. The first principle is
relevant here also, with some particularities [15]. On the dorsal that of wide ‘‘radical’’ or ‘‘en bloc’’ excision of the tumor (i.e.
side, the incisions are typically direct and longitudinal. On the without seeing the tumor), without breaching the tumor walls,
palmar side, the incisions are as longitudinal as possible or short with clear circumferential histological margins. The tumor
and oblique; Bruner incisions and short broken incisions must be resection must encompass the biopsy and drain scars. Marginal
avoided as much as possible to prevent contamination of adjacent excision is not appropriate. The second principle is to limit as much
tissues and to limit the extension of tumor excision. The biopsy as possible the functional impact of this excision, without limiting
tract must not extend beyond the borders of the skin flaps needed the quality of the surgical excision [12].
for potential distal amputations. The current trend is to reduce the surgical margins
Excisional biopsy is not recommended and must be limited to [3,15,22,42,43]. The primary objective of surgical treatment is to
benign-appearing lesions or very small lesions that do not have a obtain R0 margins (Table 4) [44]. A tissue margin of 10 mm or more
great risk of local contamination. appears sufficient [3,13,22]. But the type of tissue around the
Lastly, tumors in the Guyon canal or carpal tunnel have their tumor drives it quality more than the 1 cm margins. Interposition
own particularities. Given the difficulty of surgical revision after of healthy fascia or healthy periosteum is considered as a sufficient
biopsy and the complex anatomy and its functional after-effects, surgical margin. Bone resection is generally not necessary except
an immediate wide resection without prior biopsy may be
indicated in these two locations. This scenario is rare and the
decision must be made during a MDM. Table 3
Anatomical classification and prognostic groups used by the American Joint
Before a treatment decision is made, the histological results of Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 7th edition.
the biopsy must be reviewed in a specialized center to reduce the
Stage IA
risk of interpretation errors [37], and thereby incorrect treatment. T1a N0 M0 G1, GX
T1b N0 M0 G1, GX
3.2. Classification Stage IB
T2a N0 M0 G1, GX
T2b N0 M0 G1, GX
Once the biopsy and full work-up have been completed,
Stage IIA
the lesion must be classified and graded to implement an T1a N0 M0 G2, G3
appropriate overall treatment. The histological grade is known T1b N0 M0 G2, G3
to be one of the most important prognostic factors [38]. In Stage IIB
France, it is evaluated using the FNCLCC classification [39] (Table T2a N0 M0 G2
T2b N0 M0 G2
2). The prognostic classification system of the American Joint Stage III
Committee on Cancer (AJCC) takes into account the size, depth T2a, T2b N0 M0 G3
and extension of the tumor, lymph node involvement and ANY T N1 M0 ANY G
metastasis [40] (Table 3). Stage IV
ANY T ANY N M1 ANY G

3.3. Surgical excision treatment
Surgical excision is the cornerstone of STS treatment. The
surgical resection margins are the primary prognostic factor for
the local and general control of the tumor [13,41], along with the
T: tumor features; T1: small (< 5 cm); T2: large (> 5 cm); a: superficial location
above fascia; b: deep to fascia; N: lymph node characteristics; N0: no evidence of
lymph node metastases; N1: presence of lymph node metastases; M: distant
metastases status; M0: no evidence of distant metastases; M1: presence of distant
metastases; G: histologic grade of tumor; G1: low grade; G2: intermediate grade;
G3: high grade; GX: indeterminate grade.
236 C. Lazerges / Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation 36 (2017) 233–243
Table 4
Classification used by the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC).
R0: no tumor remnant, clear microscopic margins (this is the minimum margin
in millimeters, with description of the type of tissue making it up)
R1: presence of microscopic tumor remnant on a surgical margin
R2: presence of macroscopic tumor remnant during surgery
for cases of bone invasion or a tumor location that requires
complex excision without bone resection, with risk of breaching
the tumor (e.g. tumor surrounding more than half of a bone’s
circumference). A similar approach is used for juxta-articular STS.
Cutaneous detachment should be limited as much as possible.
In case of skin invasion, or to avoid having to do large skin
detachments, procedures to cover the skin with flaps must be
planned.
Lastly, when the tumors have developed in contact with major
nerve structures (repressed and not invaded), epineural microsur-
gical dissection is valid from a cancer treatment point of view
[45,46]. It must however be planned preoperatively [47] and an
adjuvant treatment is often necessary. This is even more important
in the hand and forearm, when sacrificing a major nerve would
lead to major loss of function.
Despite all this, larger excision margins must be planned for
certain STS histological types with generally poorly defined
anatomical limits (clear-cell sarcomas, epithelioid sarcomas,
myxofibrosarcomas).
In cases of STS that were not operated adequately initially or
were discovered accidentally during the excision of a tumor
thought to be benign, it is essential to refer these patients to a
specialized cancer treatment center. Surgical revision is often
needed, along with adjuvant radiation therapy [29]. Unfortunately,
the excision ends up being wider, more complex and often more
mutilating that it could have been initially.
The freshly excised tumor piece must be sent for histopatho-
logical analysis with appropriate landmarks in place to confirm the
diagnosis, tumor grade and to determine the excision margins.
In the forearm and wrist, thanks to the large number of
reconstruction techniques and the progress in adjuvant treat-
ments, there is practically no place for treatment by amputation
[15]. In the hand, the treatment must be as conservative as
possible. This is possible for superficial STS or those on the dorsal
side. Unfortunately for deep or palmar STS, the most appropriate
surgical treatment is often partial amputation of the hand [48] or
amputation of one or more rays [49,50].
Proximal STS in the fingers require that one or more rays be
amputated, while distal STS can be treated by proximal or distal
interphalangeal amputation [14]. Only the most superficial STS can
be treated more conservatively. Distal amputation may require
skin coverage procedures with a flap to limit the extent of the
amputation and to reduce the functional impact.
STS that are very advanced locally and difficult to operate
immediately in a tissue-sparing manner can benefit in some cases
from neoadjuvant treatments (chemotherapy, isolated limb
perfusion, radiation therapy), in order to facilitate the surgical
treatment and to avoid or limit amputation, if possible. Lastly, in
the cases of metastatic STS at the onset, it is reasonable to reject a
surgical procedure that would be functionally very disabling.
3.4. Functional reconstruction
To limit the functional impact of surgical STS treatment in the
hand and forearm, all the surgical reconstruction procedures must
be anticipated and planned preoperatively, particularly during the
MDM. Depending on the health care facility in question, the
treatment team must include an oncology surgeon, hand surgeon
and plastic surgeon.
3.4.1. Planning
When possible, reconstructive surgery must be performed
simultaneously with the tumor excision surgery [12,15,43]. This
will allow any adjuvant treatments (radiation therapy and/or
chemotherapy) to be initiated as soon possible and to optimize the
functional recovery. In the ideal case, reconstructive surgery will
only be delayed if there is a doubt about the excision margins.
Because of STS polymorphism, there is no systematic treatment,
only treatment on a case-by-case basis. The full range of
reconstructive techniques must be used. This reconstructive
surgery is even more critical with distal STS.
There are several reconstructive techniques. They can combine
skin coverage procedures with nerve, vascular, bone and joint
reconstruction. Lastly, when functional reconstruction is needed,
all the tissues needed for the reconstruction must to be harvested
before the tumor excision surgery if possible. In the least,
dedicated surgical instruments are used for the harvesting that
have not been used for tumor excision, so as to limit the risks of
contamination in the surgical sites.
3.4.2. Skin and nail coverage
To obtain fast, high-quality healing, skin coverage is an essential
component of the reconstruction.
Recent studies have highlighted the potential contribution of
negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT), either to delay the
reconstruction technique or to contribute to healing after STS
excision [51,52]. NPWT stimulates angiogenesis, thus it can only be
used if there are no tumor remnants (R0). If this is not the case, it is
formally contraindicated and is controversial while waiting for the
histopathology results.
Skin grafts are only indicated if there is healthy muscle,
periosteum or synovial tissue after excision that can protect the
underlying anatomical structures. If there is a resulting defect with
exposure, particularly of tendons in the hand and wrist, flap
coverage is required. In rare cases (precarious general health,
comorbidities), the need for a coverage flap can be avoided by
using artificial skin.
Local pedicled or perforating flaps are often the first option
considered. In the hand and forearm, most defects can be covered
by a radial antebrachial flap (and its perforating variations that do
not sacrifice the radial artery) and the posterior interosseous flap.
The pedicled lateral brachial flap has a role in reconstructing
defects in the proximal portion of the forearm. However, pedicled
flaps can only be used with small defects. In addition, these local
flaps increase the local wound healing area and bring the tumor
excision site and harvest site into contact, thereby increase the risk
of cross-contamination [14].
It is almost always possible to use a free flap for skin coverage.
Several authors have reported that the results are at least as good
as with local flaps [53,54]. The choice of flap types is even larger. In
the hand and forearm, thin fasciocutaneous flaps are preferred as
they can recreate tendon gliding planes and provide the best
esthetics possible, with low functional and cosmetic sequelae.
Perforator flaps have a role here, such as the anterolateral thigh
(ALT) flap (Fig. 1) or the thoracodorsal artery perforator (TAP) flap
for the volar side of the hand, as it is typically harvested from
hairless skin. Other options are possible, such as lateral brachial,
scapular and parascapular, abdominal or inguinal flaps. Muscle
flaps are not used in the hand and forearm, except in cases of very
large defects.
Skin coverage flap procedures can also be indicated to limit the
amputation level.
3.4.3. Bone and joint reconstruction
Excision of STS in the hand and forearm may also require that
bone or joint be removed.
 C. Lazerges / Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation 36 (2017) 233–243 237

Fig. 1. High-grade undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma on the dorsal side of the left forearm. Clinical appearance (A) and MRI appearance in T1 FS DIXON axial slice with
contrast with suspicion of periosteal invasion of the distal ulna (B). One-piece excision that takes a 10  15 cm skin pallet with the finger extensors, extensor carpi ulnaris and
distal ulna (C). Excised tumor (D). Design of made-to-measure contralateral free anterolateral thigh (ALT) perforator flap. Skin reconstruction with ALT without immediate
reconstruction of the extensor tendons or bone reconstruction of the distal ulna (F). Postoperative chemotherapy and radiation therapy.

For bone defects under 5 cm, reconstruction is typically done
using an autologous corticocancellous bone graft (iliac crest,
proximal ulna, radius, proximal tibia). In the context of STS,
contrary to benign hand tumors, corticocancellous allografts and
bone substitutes are rarely used. In the hand, in most cases,
autologous corticocancellous grafts allow reconstruction of the
metacarpals and fusion of the carpometacarpal and/or metatarso-
phalangeal joints. In more rare cases, these standard corticocan-
cellous grafts can be used to perform radiocarpal or
radiometacarpal fusion (Fig. 2), but this increases the risk of
nonunion when the graft exceeds 5 cm. These grafts are done in
one or two stages using the induced membrane technique,
according to the preoperative plan and while waiting for the
histopathology results.
With bone defects larger than 5 cm, it is classically recom-
mended to use vascularized bone grafts [55]. In the forearm and
wrist, a vascularized fibular graft is preferred [15]. Its shape and
diameter are suitable to diaphyseal reconstruction of the radius
and/or ulna (split fibula), to performing radiocarpal or radio-
scapholunate fusion, or even to performing a one-bone forearm
reconstruction. Masquelet’s induced membrane technique has a
role here also [56] in the diaphyseal reconstruction of the forearm.
In STS of the hand and wrist, structural articular allografts of the
distal radius or metacarpals, described in the context of giant cell
tumors and arthroplasty procedures, have little role in current
practice.
And in the wrist, wide resection (more than 6 cm) of the distal
ulna can be reconstructed with a vascularized fibula graft,
lengthening [57] or a distal radio-ulnar prosthesis, even though
some authors have found no functional consequences to wide
resection of the distal ulna [58].
3.4.4. Tendon reconstruction
In the ideal case, tendon reconstruction will be performed right
always if skin coverage is appropriate [15]. In the context of tendon
defects with the muscle belly intact, reconstruction is done with
238 C. Lazerges / Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation 36 (2017) 233–243

Fig. 2. Grade 2 myxofibrosarcoma on the dorsal side of the right wrist that has invaded the radiocarpal and distal radio-ulnar joints. Frontal T2 STIR MRI slice (A) and axial T2
STIR MRI slice (B). Frontal MRI showing the bone invasion (C). Clinical presentation (D). One-piece radiocarpal and distal radio-ulnar arthrectomy with musculotendinous
resection of the wrist and finger extensors (E). Surgical resection piece (F). Reconstruction by tenodesis of the finger extensors, radiometacarpal fusion, and M1-M2 fusion
with corticocancellous iliac crest graft and fixation by locking plate (G). Radiograph taken at the latest follow-up (H). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and postoperative radiation
therapy. Functional results: MSTS 76%, DASH 45, VAS for pain 3.

standard tendon autografts (palmaris longus, hemi-flexor carpi
radialis, gracilis, semitendinosus, fascia lata, plantaris) (Fig. 3). The
advantage of gracilis tendon, semitendinosus tendon and fascia
lata autografts is that they can be used to reconstruct multiple
tendon slips.
When the muscle bellies are sacrificed during the tumor
excision, reconstruction makes use of the standard tendon transfer
techniques for radial palsy or brachial plexus injuries. Functional
free flaps are rarely used (free re-innervated transfer of gracilis to
reconstruct finger flexors and extensors [59], free tendon transfer
(dorsalis pedis flap) to reconstruct the finger extensors [60]).
3.4.5. Nerve reconstruction
Nerve reconstruction also typically uses interposition grafts
(sural nerves), or even distal nerve transfers and in rare cases,
vascularized nerve grafts. A vascular graft may also be needed.
The complexity of the treatment at the hand and wrist stems
from the combination of defects in multiple tissues and the need
for combined functional reconstruction. Consequently, reconstruc-
tion procedures must not be considered individually, but as a
whole (Fig. 4). For example, bone and skin defects can be treated
with an osteofasciocutaneous flap (free osteocutaneous flap of
vascularized fibula); skin, bone and vascular defects can be treated
with an osteocutaneous vessel-holder flap (free contralateral
radial antebrachial flap).
3.5. Adjuvant treatments
3.5.1. Isolated limb perfusion [61]
This consists of perfusing a limb (with tourniquet) with tumor
necrosis factor a (TNF-a) or Melphalan, and is mainly indicated for
STS in the extremities. It can be performed in the same way as
neoadjuvant radiation therapy, in the context of locally very
advanced STS, in which immediate excision is likely to induce
major functional sequelae or does not allow for limb-sparing
surgery.
3.5.2. Radiation therapy
Radiation therapy is standard in STS treatment. It is known to
improve the local control of STS [62]. The effectiveness in terms of
local control is the same whether it is done as a neoadjuvant
(before surgical excision) or adjuvant (after surgical excision)
treatment. However, there is a greater risk of postoperative
complications with neoadjuvant treatment and a greater risk of
delayed complications with adjuvant treatment [63]. In the hand
and forearm, despite the thin tissues and nearby functional
anatomical structures, Bray et al. [26] have found that toxicity is
rarely a problem and should not preclude radiation therapy from
being performed. Nevertheless, radiation therapy will not negate
the consequences of positive surgical margins [64]. Also, neoadju-
vant or adjuvant radiation therapy does not appear to hinder the
 C. Lazerges / Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation 36 (2017) 233–243 239

Fig. 3. Epitheloid sarcoma on the volar side of the right hand that has extended to the thenar eminence and encompasses the trapeziometacarpal joint. T2-weighted FS axial
MRI slice: hyperintense infiltrate that is poorly limited on the superficial side of the flexor retinaculum, extending to the 1st metacarpal (A). T1-weighted GADO frontal MRI
slice: poorly limited hyperintense infiltrate (B). Preoperative clinical presentation (C). En bloc skin and bone excision taking the flexor retinaculum, 1st metacarpal and
trapezium (D). Temporary fixation while waiting for the histopathology results (E). Delayed reconstruction after the surgical excision margins were confirmed. Skin coverage
using a pedicled posterior interosseous flap (F). Bone reconstruction of the 1st metacarpal with a corticocancellous graft with thumb metacarpophalangeal fusion and M1-M2
fusion (G). Functional outcomes at latest follow-up: MSTS 70%, DASH 49, VAS pain 4. Postoperative radiation therapy (H).

microsurgical reconstruction [65] that is often needed in the hand development of targeted therapies could modify this care in
and forearm. the future.

3.5.3. Chemotherapy 4. Disease monitoring

Most STS are not very sensitive to chemotherapy. There is
currently no formal recommendation for its use [66,67]. The
indication for chemotherapy (neoadjuvant, adjuvant or isolated)
is made on a case-by-case basis at the MDM based on the tumor
grade, metastatic potential and its operability; based on certain
criteria, it can be proposed in the context of clinical trial
protocols. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is typically reserved for
initially metastatic STS. Adjuvant chemotherapy is an option for
STS with poor prognosis (deep, large and high-grade tumors) and
in the case of lymph node invasion or metastasis. The
There is no true monitoring standard. At most hospitals, follow-
up visits are scheduled every 6 months (every 4 months for
medium and high-grade tumors) for the first 3 years, then twice a
year for up to 5 years and once per year for up to 10 years. It
consists of a well-defined, comprehensive clinical examination,
including adenopathy detection, particularly for tumors that target
the lymph nodes. MRI of the local tissues and a chest and abdomen/
pelvis CT with contrast along with a PET scan are also done if there
is any doubt.
240 C. Lazerges / Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation 36 (2017) 233–243

Fig. 4. Synovial sarcoma on the dorsal side of the 1st web space of the left hand discovered by chance after cyst excision. Secondary treatment with no imaging done before the
first excision. Clinical presentation with drawing of the initial surgical scar and the excision margins (A). ‘‘En bloc’’ skin and tendon excision with resection of the abductor
pollicis longus, extensor pollicis longus and brevis, and extensor carpus brevis (B). Surgical excision piece (C). Locating the abductor longus, extensor pollicis longus and
extensor carpus tendons before the tendon reconstruction (D). Tendon reconstruction by transfer of the extensor indicis proprius on the extensor pollicis longus and palmaris
longus interposition graft on the abductor pollicis longus and the carpal extensors (E). Skin coverage using a pedicled posterior interosseous flap (F). Functional outcomes:
MSTS 93%, DASH 0, VAS pain 0 (G). Neoadjuvant and adjuvant chemotherapy, no radiation therapy.

5. Results of the treatment of hand and forearm STS
5.1. Cancer-related outcomes
There are only a few studies on survival specifically for STS in
the hand and forearm. Many studies are small case reports or
clinical case-series. STS in the hand or wrist appears to have a
better prognosis than in other locations [68]. Yamada et al.
reported overall 5-year survival of 89% for distal STS in the upper
limb relative to 66% for proximal STS in the upper limb; the
recurrence-free 5-year survival was 87% versus 74% and the
survival without metastasis was 84% versus 66% [69]. Most studies
of hand and wrist STS report overall 5-year survival between 80%
and 90% [12,25,70,71]. However, these studies emphasize the need
to obtain clear surgical margins to limit the risk of local recurrence
or metastasis. According to Pradhan et al., inappropriate surgical
margins lead to a 12-times higher risk of local recurrence [25]. The
local recurrence risk was 37% at 5 years and 52% at 10 years. Overall
survival went from 87% at 5 years to 71% at 10 years. They
concluded that limb-sparing surgery must not be done at the
expense of good surgical margins.
Gerrand et al. introduced the concept of ‘‘planned positive
margins’’ followed by radiation therapy. In certain cases of
well-differentiated tumors, or to preserve important anatomical
structures, the local recurrence does not seem to be higher when
marginal resection is planned [47]. Kemp et al. found similar
results in the context of liposarcoma that make contact with major
nerves in the forearm and were treated by epineurectomy without
nerve sacrifice [45].
STS that are initially operated in an inadequate manner have a
worse prognosis [27–30,41]. However, after re-excision and radia-
tion therapy, some studies, particularly ones in the hand [25], have
found similar results with STS patients operated correctly right away
[72]. Any microscopic residual found during the re-excision is a
prognostic factor for worse overall survival, recurrence-free survival
and metastasis [41,72]. And despite appropriate treatment, certain
histological STS types, particularly clear-cell sarcomas and epitheli-
oid sarcomas appear to have a worse prognosis [25].
5.2. Functional outcomes
Most authors now defend the importance of microsurgical
reconstructive surgery for STS of the hand and forearm to optimize
the functional outcomes [12,73]. In fact, surgery, even limb-
sparing, is often mutilating given the proximity of functional
anatomical structures. It is however difficult to accurately define
 C. Lazerges / Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation 36 (2017) 233–243
Fig. 5. Treatment algorithm for the care of soft tissue tumors in the hand, wrist and forearm.
the functional outcomes, given the polymorphism of STS in the
forearm and hand, with extremely variable surgical excision and
surgical reconstruction.
Most clinical studies evaluate the functional outcomes using
the Enneking score (Musculoskeletal Tumor Society rating Scale
[MSTS]) [74] and report good or excellent scores, with average
scores of 83% or better [12,26,71,73]. Lehnhardt et al. found a mean
DASH score of 37; Mirous et al., who emphasized the need for early
functional reconstruction, found a mean DASH score of 18. In the
Bray et al. study, the functional outcomes were better for STS in the
forearm relative to STS in the hand and wrist, with MSTS scores of
31 versus 27 (out of 35) and Toronto Extremity Salvage Score
(TESS) of 94 versus 88 [75]. In their study, 88% of non-amputated
STS patients were able to resume their previous activities [26].
As expected, STS patients who required radical treatment by
amputation had worse functional results [12,26,71,73]. According
to Yamada et al., deep STS and STS that were initially operated in a
non-specialist center seem to have the worse functional results
[69]. Lastly, radiation therapy, even when it is combined with
reconstructive techniques, appears to be a prognostic factor for
worse functional outcomes [12,26,71].
6. Conclusion
While malignant soft tissue tumors of the hand, wrist and
forearm appear to have a better prognosis than those in other
locations, their treatment must not be taken lightly. Too often
these tumors undergo an inappropriate first-line treatment, which
negatively impacts both survival and function. By following a well-
defined diagnostic and treatment protocol, these diagnostic errors
can be minimized and these tumors can be treated in the optimal
manner (Fig. 5).
Hence, for any mass in the hand, wrist or forearm that has an
atypical presentation, one must suspect malignancy and refer the
241
patient to a specialized cancer treatment center. A biopsy is
essential before any surgical treatment and drives the treatment.
Surgical excision is the primary component of treatment. It
must be as conservative as possible to limit the functional impact,
but must not be minimized at the expense of good tumor resection.
Other than for STS in the fingers, multiple surgical reconstruction
techniques can be used to avoid radical surgical excision by
amputation. These techniques, when planned preoperatively,
make it possible to reconcile both the cancer-related and
functional requirements.
Disclosure of interest
The author declares that he has no competing interest.
References
[1] Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin
2013;63:11–30.
[2] Jane MJ, Hughes PJ. Disease incidence and results of extremity lesion treat-
ment: Mersey region soft tissue sarcomas (1975–1985). Sarcoma 1998;2:
89–96.
[3] Bonvalot S, Missenard G, Rosset P, Terrier P, Le Péchoux C, Le Cesne A. Principes
du traitement chirurgical des sarcomes des tissus mous des membres et du
tronc de l’adulte. EMC – Appar Locomoteur 2013;8(4):1–11 [Paris: Elsevier
Masson].
[4] Mastrangelo G, Coindre J-M, Ducimetière F, Dei Tos AP, Fadda E, Blay J-Y, et al.
Incidence of soft tissue sarcoma and beyond: a population-based prospective
study in 3 European regions. Cancer 2012;118:5339–48.
[5] Gerrand CH, Bell RS, Wunder JS, Kandel RA, O’Sullivan B, Catton CN, et al. The
influence of anatomic location on outcome in patients with soft tissue sarcoma
of the extremity. Cancer 2003;97:485–92.
[6] Gustafson P, Arner M. Soft tissue sarcoma of the upper extremity: descriptive
data and outcome in a population-based series of 108 adult patients. J Hand
Surg Am 1999;24:668–74.
[7] Lahat G, Lazar A, Lev D. Sarcoma epidemiology and etiology: potential envi-
ronmental and genetic factors. Surg Clin North Am 2008;88:451–81.
[8] Fletcher CDM, Bridge JA, Hogendoorn P, Mertens F. WHO Classification of
tumours of soft tissue and bone, 4th ed., Lyon: IARC; 2013.
242 C. Lazerges / Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation 36 (2017) 233–243
[9] Murray PM. Soft tissue sarcoma of the upper extremity. Hand Clin
2004;20:325–33.
[10] Alamanda VK, Crosby SN, Archer KR, Song Y, Schwartz HS, Holt GE. Amputation
for extremity soft tissue sarcoma does not increase overall survival: a retro-
spective cohort study. Eur J Surg Oncol 2012;38:1178–83.
[11] Rosenberg SA, Tepper J, Glatstein E, Costa J, Baker A, Brennan M, et al. The
treatment of soft-tissue sarcomas of the extremities: prospective randomized
evaluations of (1) limb-sparing surgery plus radiation therapy compared with
amputation and (2) the role of adjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg
1982;196:305–15.
[12] Mirous MP, Coulet B, Chammas M, Cupissol D, Lazerges C. Extensive limb-
sparing surgery with reconstruction for sarcoma of the hand and wrist. Orthop
Traumatol Surg Res 2016;102:467–72.
[13] Muramatsu K, Ihara K, Yoshida K, Tominaga Y, Hashimoto T, Taguchi T.
Musculoskeletal sarcomas in the forearm and hand: standard treatment
and microsurgical reconstruction for limb salvage. Anticancer Res
2013;33:4175–82.
[14] Leit ME, Tomaino MM. Principles of limb salvage surgery of the upper
extremity. Hand Clin 2004;20:167–79.
[15] Athanasian EA, Jebson PJL, Kakar S, Murray PM. Tumors of the hand and upper
extremity. Chicago: ASSH; 2015.
[16] Peterson JJ, Bancroft LW, Kransdorf MJ. Principles of bone and soft tissue
imaging. Hand Clin 2004;20:147–66.
[17] Berger F, Winkler EC, Ruderer C, Reiser MF. Imaging of soft tissue sarcomas:
standard approaches and new strategies. Chirurg 2009;80:175–85.
[18] Capelastegui A, Astigarraga E, Fernandez-Canton G, Saralegui I, Larena JA,
Merino A. Masses and pseudomasses of the hand and wrist: MR findings in
134 cases. Skeletal Radiol 1999;28:498–507.
[19] Al-Ibraheem A, Buck AK, Benz MR, Rudert M, Beer AJ, Mansour A, et al. (18) F-
fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for
the detection of recurrent bone and soft tissue sarcoma. Cancer
2013;119:1227–34.
[20] Kogay M, Thariat J, Benisvy D, Dufour M, Gastaud L, Saada E, et al. [Is FDG TEP
CT practice changing in the management of sarcomas in adults?] Bull Cancer
(Paris) 2016;103:735–42.
[21] Choi YY, Kim JY, Yang S-O. PET/CT in benign and malignant musculoskeletal
tumors and tumor-like conditions. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2014;18:
133–48.
[22] Dujardin F, Abdulmutalib H, Aktouf G, Michelin P. Principes du traitement
chirurgical des sarcomes des tissus mous de l’adulte. EMC – Tech Chir –
Orthopedie – Traumatol 2013;8(2):1–9 [Paris: Elsevier Masson].
[23] Casali PG, Blay JY. Soft tissue sarcomas: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for
diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2010;21(Suppl. 5):v198–203.
[24] Grimer R, Judson I, Peake D, Seddon B. Guidelines for the management of soft
tissue sarcomas. Sarcoma 2010;2010:506182.
[25] Pradhan A, Cheung YC, Grimer RJ, Peake D, Al-Muderis OA, Thomas JM, et al.
Soft-tissue sarcomas of the hand: oncological outcome and prognostic factors.
J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008;90:209–14.
[26] Bray PW, Bell RS, Bowen CV, Davis A, O’Sullivan B. Limb salvage surgery and
adjuvant radiotherapy for soft tissue sarcomas of the forearm and hand. J Hand
Surg Am 1997;22:495–503.
[27] Qureshi YA, Huddy JR, Miller JD, Strauss DC, Thomas JM, Hayes AJ. Unplanned
excision of soft tissue sarcoma results in increased rates of local recurrence
despite full further oncological treatment. Ann Surg Oncol 2012;19:871–7.
[28] Siebenrock KA, Hertel R, Ganz R. Unexpected resection of soft-tissue sarcoma.
More mutilating surgery, higher local recurrence rates, and obscure prognosis
as consequences of improper surgery. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2000;120:
65–9.
[29] Noria S, Davis A, Kandel R, Levesque J, O’Sullivan B, Wunder J, et al. Residual
disease following unplanned excision of soft-tissue sarcoma of an extremity. J
Bone Joint Surg Am 1996;78:650–5.
[30] Davis AM, Kandel RA, Wunder JS, Unger R, Meer J, O’Sullivan B, et al. The
impact of residual disease on local recurrence in patients treated by initial
unplanned resection for soft tissue sarcoma of the extremity. J Surg Oncol
1997;66:81–7.
[31] Rydholm A. Improving the management of soft tissue sarcoma. Diagnosis and
treatment should be given in specialist centres. BMJ 1998;317:93–4.
[32] Bhangu AA, Beard JS, Grimer RJ. Should soft tissue sarcomas be treated at a
specialist centre? Sarcoma 2004;8:1–6.
[33] Lehnhardt M, Daigeler A, Homann HH, Hauser J, Langer S, Steinsträsser L, et al.
Importance of specialized centers in diagnosis and treatment of extremity-soft
tissue sarcomas. Review of 603 cases. Chirurg 2009;80:341–7.
[34] Mankin HJ, Lange TA, Spanier SS. The hazards of biopsy in patients with
malignant primary bone and soft-tissue tumors. J Bone Joint Surg Am
1982;64:1121–7.
[35] Hoeber I, Spillane AJ, Fisher C, Thomas JM. Accuracy of biopsy techniques for
limb and limb girdle soft tissue tumors. Ann Surg Oncol 2001;8:80–7.
[36] Skrzynski MC, Biermann JS, Montag A, Simon MA. Diagnostic accuracy and
charge-savings of outpatient core needle biopsy compared with open biopsy of
musculoskeletal tumors. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1996;78:644–9.
[37] Ray-Coquard I, Montesco MC, Coindre JM, Dei Tos AP, Lurkin A, Ranchère-
Vince D, et al. Sarcoma: concordance between initial diagnosis and centralized
expert review in a population-based study within three European regions. Ann
Oncol 2012;23:2442–9.
[38] Coindre JM, Terrier P, Bui NB, Bonichon F, Collin F, Le Doussal V, et al.
Prognostic factors in adult patients with locally controlled soft tissue sarcoma.
A study of 546 patients from the French Federation of Cancer Centers Sarcoma
Group. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:869–77.
[39] Trojani M, Contesso G, Coindre JM, Rouesse J, Bui NB, de Mascarel A, et al.
Soft-tissue sarcomas of adults; study of pathological prognostic variables and
definition of a histopathological grading system. Int J Cancer 1984; 33:37–42.
[40] Edge SB, Compton CC. The American Joint Committee on Cancer: the 7th
edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual and the future of TNM. Ann Surg
Oncol 2010;17:1471–4.
[41] Pisters PW, Leung DH, Woodruff J, Shi W, Brennan MF. Analysis of prognostic
factors in 1,041 patients with localized soft tissue sarcomas of the extremities.
J Clin Oncol 1996;14:1679–89.
[42] Wright EHC, Gwilym S, Gibbons CLMH, Critchley P, Giele HP. Functional and
oncological outcomes after limb-salvage surgery for primary sarcomas of the
upper limb. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2008;61:382–7.
[43] Koulaxouzidis G, Simunovic F, Bannasch H. Soft tissue sarcomas of the arm –
oncosurgical and reconstructive principles within a multimodal, interdisci-
plinary setting. Surg Oncol 2016;12.
[44] Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C, International Union against Can-
cer, editors. TNM classification of malignant tumours. 7th ed., Chichester,
West Sussex, UK; Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell; 2010.
[45] Kemp MA, Hinsley DE, Gwilym SE, Giele HP, Athanasou NA, Gibbons CL.
Functional and oncological outcome following marginal excision of well-
differentiated forearm liposarcoma with nerve involvement. J Hand Surg
Am 2011;36:94–100.
[46] Clarkson PW, Griffin AM, Catton CN, O’Sullivan B, Ferguson PC, Wunder JS,
et al. Epineural dissection is a safe technique that facilitates limb salvage
surgery. Clin Orthop 2005;438:92–6.
[47] Gerrand CH, Wunder JS, Kandel RA, O’Sullivan B, Catton CN, Bell RS, et al.
Classification of positive margins after resection of soft-tissue sarcoma of
the limb predicts the risk of local recurrence. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001;
83:1149–55.
[48] Puhaindran ME, Steensma MR, Athanasian EA. Partial hand preservation
for large soft tissue sarcomas of the hand. J Hand Surg Am 2010;35:291–5.
[49] Puhaindran ME, Athanasian EA. Double ray amputation for tumors of the hand.
Clin Orthop 2010;468:2976–9.
[50] Puhaindran ME, Healey JH, Athanasian EA. Single ray amputation for tumors of
the hand. Clin Orthop 2010;468:1390–5.
[51] Sakellariou VI, Mavrogenis AF, Papagelopoulos PJ. Negative-pressure wound
therapy for musculoskeletal tumor surgery. Adv Skin Wound Care
2011;24:25–30.
[52] Chen YU, Xu S-F, Xu M, Yu X-C. Use of negative pressure wound therapy as an
adjunct to the treatment of extremity soft-tissue sarcoma with ulceration or
impending ulceration. Oncol Lett 2016;12:757–63.
[53] Barner-Rasmussen I, Popov P, Böhling T, Blomqvist C, Tukiainen E. Microvas-
cular reconstructions after extensive soft tissue sarcoma resections in the
upper limb. Eur J Surg Oncol 2010;36:78–83.
[54] Payne CE, Hofer SOP, Zhong T, Griffin AC, Ferguson PC, Wunder JS. Functional
outcome following upper limb soft tissue sarcoma resection with flap recon-
struction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2013;66:601–7.
[55] Wood MB. Free vascularized bone transfers for nonunions, segmental gaps,
and following tumor resection. Orthopedics 1986;9:810–6.
[56] Micev AJ, Kalainov DM, Soneru AP. Masquelet technique for treatment of
segmental bone loss in the upper extremity. J Hand Surg Am 2015;40:593–8.
[57] Lazerges C, Mares O, Chammas M, Coulet B. Lengthening osteotomy for
reconstruction following wide resection of the distal part of the ulna: a report
of two cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93 [e91 1-5].
[58] Wolfe SW, Mih AD, Hotchkiss RN, Culp RW, Keifhaber TR, Nagle DJ. Wide
excision of the distal ulna: a multicenter case study. J Hand Surg Am
1998;23:222–8.
[59] Chuang DC, Strauch RJ, Wei FC. Technical considerations in two-stage func-
tioning free muscle transplantation reconstruction of both flexor and extensor
functions of the forearm. Microsurgery 1994;15:338–43.
[60] Vila-Rovira R, Ferreira BJ, Guinot A. Transfer of vascularized extensor tendons
from the foot to the hand with a dorsalis pedis flap. Plast Reconstr Surg
1985;76:421–7.
[61] Lejeune FJ, Pujol N, Liénard D, Mosimann F, Raffoul W, Genton A, et al. Limb
salvage by neoadjuvant isolated perfusion with TNFalpha and melphalan for
non-resectable soft tissue sarcoma of the extremities. Eur J Surg Oncol
2000;26:669–78.
[62] Jebsen NL, Trovik CS, Bauer HCF, Rydholm A, Monge OR, Hall KS, et al.
Radiotherapy to improve local control regardless of surgical margin and
malignancy grade in extremity and trunk wall soft tissue sarcoma: a Scandi-
navian sarcoma group study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;71:1196–203.
[63] O’Sullivan B, Davis AM, Turcotte R, Bell R, Catton C, Chabot P, et al. Preoperative
versus postoperative radiotherapy in soft-tissue sarcoma of the limbs: a
randomised trial. Lancet 2002;359:2235–41.
[64] Brien EW, Terek RM, Geer RJ, Caldwell G, Brennan MF, Healey JH. Treatment of
soft-tissue sarcomas of the hand. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995;77:564–71.
[65] Townley WA, Mah E, O’Neill AC, Wunder JS, Ferguson PC, Zhong T, et al.
Reconstruction of sarcoma defects following pre-operative radiation: free
tissue transfer is safe and reliable. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2013;66:
1575–9.
[66] Woll PJ, Reichardt P, Le Cesne A, Bonvalot S, Azzarelli A, Hoekstra HJ, et al.
Adjuvant chemotherapy with doxorubicin, ifosfamide, and lenograstim for
resected soft-tissue sarcoma (EORTC 62931): a multicentre randomised con-
trolled trial. Lancet Oncol 2012;13:1045–54.
 C. Lazerges / Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation 36 (2017) 233–243
[67] Pervaiz N, Colterjohn N, Farrokhyar F, Tozer R, Figueredo A, Ghert M. A
systematic meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of adjuvant chemo-
therapy for localized resectable soft-tissue sarcoma. Cancer 2008;113:573–81.
[68] Buecker PJ, Villafuerte JE, Hornicek FJ, Gebhardt MC, Mankin HJ. Improved
survival for sarcomas of the wrist and hand. J Hand Surg Am 2006;31:452–5.
[69] Yamada Y, Nishida Y, Nakashima H, Sugiura H, Tsukushi S, Kamei Y, et al.
Oncologic and functional outcomes of soft tissue sarcomas of the distal upper
extremity: comparison with those of the proximal upper extremity. Int Surg
2010;95:33–9.
[70] Lehnhardt M, Hirche C, Daigeler A, Goertz O, Ring A, Hirsch T, et al. Soft tissue
sarcoma of the upper extremities. Analysis of factors relevant for prognosis in
160 patients. Chirurg 2012;83:143–52.
[71] Puhaindran ME, Rohde RS, Chou J, Morris CD, Athanasian EA. Clinical
outcomes for patients with soft tissue sarcoma of the hand. Cancer
2011;117:175–9.
243
[72] Fiore M, Casali PG, Miceli R, Mariani L, Bertulli R, Lozza L, et al. Prognostic effect
of re-excision in adult soft tissue sarcoma of the extremity. Ann Surg Oncol
2006;13:110–7.
[73] Muramatsu K, Ihara K, Doi K, Hashimoto T, Taguchi T. Sarcoma in the forearm
and hand: clinical outcomes and microsurgical reconstruction for limb sal-
vage. Ann Plast Surg 2009;62:28–33.
[74] Wada T, Kawai A, Ihara K, Sasaki M, Sonoda T, Imaeda T, et al. Construct validity
of the Enneking score for measuring function in patients with malignant or
aggressive benign tumours of the upper limb. J Bone Joint Surg Br
2007;89:659–63.
[75] Davis AM, Wright JG, Williams JI, Bombardier C, Griffin A, Bell RS. Develop-
ment of a measure of physical function for patients with bone and soft tissue
sarcoma. Qual Life Res 1996;5:508–16.