Review for 10.1186/s12876-019-1140-8 (2019)

Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Danaparoid sodium -based anticoagulation therapy for port al vein thrombosis in cirrhosis 
patients  
 
Version: 0 Date: 27 Jul 2019  
 
Reviewer: Xingshun Qi  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
This topic is very interesting. From my perspective, this paper is suitable for the publication in 
this journal. However, some comments should be addressed.  
 
 
First, the authors seemed to give anticoagulation for all of their patients with PVT. Do you have 
a group of patients who did not receive anticoagulation. A group of patients who did not receive 
anticoagulation may be useful to enhance the value of anticoagulation therapy.  
 
 
Second, indeed, transient PVT in liver cirrhosis has been recognized (PMID: 29871683). If you 
do not have a group of patients who did not receive anticoagulation, please discuss this 
possibility of transient PVT.  
 
 
Third, a previous meta -analysis suggested that the pooled rate of portal recanalization should be 
66.6% (95% CI=54.7% -77.6%) (PMID: 25566699). It seems that the authors reported a portal 
recanalization rate of 100%. This phenomen may be explained by the heterogeneity in 
characteristics of PVT (gra de, extension, and stage). Please discuss the reasons.  
 
 
Fourth, I am not sure about the cost of ATIII. The cost -effectiveness of a combination therapy 
should be discussed.  
 
 
 
Minor  
 
Please pay attention to the wrong spellings, such as "... of PTV volume .. ." in line 225.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Are the meth ods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are the co nclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistica l review is recommended, please speci fy what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I recommend additional statistical review  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain  or lose financial ly from the publication of this 
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat may in any way gain or lose 
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the fut ure? 
 
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of  the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
 
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have  no competin g interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is acce pted f or publication, my named report 
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons .org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be in cluded as confidential comments 
to the editor s, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal