Review for 10.1186/s12876-025-04058-9 (2025)

Title: Features on Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography for Predicting Recurrent
Esophageal Variceal Bleeding in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Version: 3 Date: 04 Sep 2024
Reviewer:  Hiroki Minamiguchi
Reviewer's report:
Review of Features on Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography for Predicting Recurrent
Esophageal Variceal Bleeding in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma by Dr. Ping-Chien Li.
General comments.
Major revision needed.
Specific comments.
TITLE
1. Good.
ABSTRACT
2. “(PVT) and the area under a receiver operating characteristic curve” The color of these letters
is red. Is this a correction error? Please confirm.
Imaging Analysis
3.”the most protruding submucosal EV” Why was this study analyzed by lateral distance and
not by projection direction?
4.” the interveinal administration could be easily managed” It's hard to understand what this
sentence means.
5.“(PVT)” The color of this letter is red. Is this a correction error? Please confirm.
6. Is chest CT performed as standard for all follow-up of HCC at the author's institution? Please
provide additional information on the issue of radiation exposure.
Result
7.” not statistically associated with” significant is more common than associated?
Discussion
8.” Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE)” TACE is usually an abbreviation for
transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. Please correct.
9.” Marginally significant results” The notation “marginally significant results” cannot be used
because the aforementioned statistical analysis defined a result of less than 0.05 as statistically
significant. Please correct.
10. “transjugular portosystemic shunt (TIPS)” TIPS is usually an abbreviation for transjugular
intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. Please correct.
List of abbreviations
11. “List of abbreviations” The color of the letter is red. Is this a correction error? Please confirm.
12. Please correct the abbreviations of TACE and TIPS as mentioned above.
Declarations
13.”Informed consent was also waived by the ethics committee for review of patient records and
images.” The color of the letter is red. Is this a correction error? Please confirm.
Table
14. Note of Table 1 and 2, “p < 0.005 is considered statistically significant.” Mistake of 0.05?
Please confirm.
Essential Question
With esophageal varices, we sometimes experience cases with large varices that do not rupture,
or conversely, cases with small varices that do rupture. Therefore, endoscopic observation
is mandatory at our institution. Contrast-enhanced CT is also invasive in terms of radiation
exposure and iodine contrast media, and is not a complete replacement for upper gastrointestinal
endoscopy.
As far as my article search, there are some articles of the use of CT to predict rupture of
esophageal varices in similar and prior articles. Please explain why you did not list the following
three articles in your references section.
1.Computed tomography for prediction of esophageal variceal bleeding by Mohammed
Elhendawy (World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2024 Mar 16;16(3):175-177. doi: 10.4253),
2.Quantitative measurements of esophageal varices using computed tomography for prediction
of severe varices and the risk of bleeding: a preliminary study by Shang Wan (Insights Imaging.
2022 Dec; 13: 47.doi: 10.1186/s13244-022-01189-5),
3.The role of computed tomography for the prediction of esophageal variceal bleeding: Current
status and future perspectives by Alberto Martino (World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2023;15:681–
689).