Review for 10.1186/s12876-020-01302-2 (2020)

Reviewer’s report
Title: Whipple disease diagnosed by enteroscopy: First case report in Colombia of an underdiagnosed
disease and literature review.
Version: 0 Date: 07 Mar 2020
Reviewer: Massimo Bellini
Reviewer's report:
The present paper  deals with a rare and poorly  known pathology.
The clinical case is described in an exhaustive way, illustrating step by step the best diagnostic pathway
to recognize this condition after excluding the most common diseases.
The finding of microcytic anemia together with abdominal pain and diarrhea is a relatively  frequent
finding but it could be important that gastroenterologists think about this disease when no specific
disease has been detected at first- second-line  diagnostic tests. Indeed   this condition is probably often
overlooked or not recognized.
The  article  is  clearly  written  and  easily  interpretable  without  misunderstanding,  even  if  English
language has to be somewhere reviewed
I suggest the authors to highlight also in the title that is the first case described in Colombia. This is
probably the most interesting finding of this paper
Line 80: "In Colombia there a no cases reported"  &gt; probably "there are no.."
Discussion
-The authors  should also emphasize the role capsule endoscopy in the management of this  case,
highlighting the fact that both upper and lower digestive endoscopy were inconclusive 
-Lines  168-170  "In  Colombia  there  are  no  reported  cases   of  this  disease  despite  its  probable
appearance in some institutions. Therefore, this case is considered necessary and important for the
contribution to the medical literature regarding this entity" The authors should probably better express
the need for a better knowledge of this disease by gastroenterologists
Are the methods 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.
Unable to assess
Are the conclusions 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 manuscript or would you recommend an additional
statistical review?
If  an  additional  statistical  review  is  recommended,  please  specify  what  aspects  require  further
assessment in your comments to the editors.
Not relevant to this manuscript
Quality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Needs some language corrections before being published
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, fees, funding, or salary from an
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this
manuscript, either now or in the future?
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?
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 competing 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 understand that my name will be included on my
report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for 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 included as confidential comments to the editors, which will not
be published.
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal