The diagnosis of thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS) has long been a controversial and challenging one. Despite common presentations with pain in the neck and upper extremity, there are a host of presenting patterns that can vary within and between the subdivisions of neurogenic, venous, and arterial TOS. Furthermore, there is a plethora of differential diagnoses, from peripheral compressive neuropathies, to intrinsic shoulder pathologies, to pathologies at the cervical spine. Depending on the subdivision of TOS suspected, diagnostic investigations are currently of varying importance, necessitating high dependence on good history taking and clinical examination. Investigations may add weight to a diagnosis suspected on clinical grounds and suggest an optimal management strategy, but in this changing field new developments may alter the role that diagnostic investigations play. In this article, we set out to summarise the diagnostic approach in cases of suspected TOS, including the importance of history taking, clinical examination, and the role of investigations at present, and highlight the developments in this field with respect to all subtypes. In the future, we hope that novel diagnostics may be able to stratify patients according to the exact compressive mechanism and thereby suggest more specific treatments and interventions.

This review was complicated by a lack of generally accepted diagnostic criteria for the diagnosis of TOS. There was very low quality evidence that transaxillary first rib resection decreased pain more than supraclavicular neuroplasty, but no randomized evidence that either is better than no treatment. There is moderate evidence to suggest that treatment with BTX injections yielded no great improvements over placebo injections of saline. There is no evidence from RCTs for the use of other currently used treatments. There is a need for an agreed definition for the diagnosis of TOS, especially the disputed form, agreed outcome measures, and high quality randomized trials that compare the outcome of interventions with no treatment and with each other.

Surgery achieved better initial outcome at both MCP-J and PIP-J levels, and at discharge, only extension in the MCP-J level was statistically better after open excision. However the final outcome was statistically better at the PIP-J level in extension (p = 0.006) and total active movement (TAM) (p = 0.008) after treatment with collagenase clostridium histolyticum. Further studies are required to assess the long-term differences between the two groups and to investigate the outcomes for patients with multi-digit involvement.

Pancreatic metastases (PMs) from neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) are rare but the increased sensitivity of new diagnostic tools such as 68 Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT has resulted in their increased recognition at initial diagnosis or follow-up.A retrospective analysis of the data of patients from six tertiary referral centres was performed in order to identify the characteristics and the prognostic significance of PMs in patients with NENs. We used a control group of 69 age-, sexand primary tumourmatched NEN patients from the same cohort with stage IV disease but no PMs. Overall survival (OS) was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method log-rank analysis was used to assess the impact of various clinical and histopathological variables in OS. We identified 25 patients (11 females) with PMs with a median age at diagnosis of 60 years. The small intestine was the most common primary (80%) with a prevalence of 4.2% PMs (21/506). Fourteen patients presented with synchronous PMs whereas 11 developed metachronous PMs after a median time of 28 months (range: 7-168 months). Grading was available in 24 patients; 16 patients had G1 tumours, four G2, two atypical lung carcinoid, one typical and one atypical thymic carcinoid. Most patients had other concomitant metastases (12 hepatic, 4 lung and 6 bone) while five patients exhibited peritoneal carcinomatosis. Median OS in the PMs group was not reached compared with 212 months in the control group (95% CI: 26-398). The univariate analysis identified no prognostic factors statistically significantly associated with the OS. In conclusion, PMs are encountered with a low prevalence among NEN patients mostly developing in patients with advanced metastatic disease. The presence of PMs does not seem to be associated with a negative prognostic impact in OS.