Review for 10.1186/s12876-021-02051-6 (2021)

Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Three-step operation for esophago-left bronchial fistula with respiratory
failure after esophagectomy: A case report with literature review
Version: 
0 
Date: 
09 Nov 2021
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript presents very interesting case of esophago-bronchial fistula
(EBF) having difficulty in treatment and valuable experience of effective multi-
step surgery without thoracotomy.
On the other hand, I think that this manuscript has some problems as indicated
below.
The authors mentioned some problems of surgical treatment of EBF in back
ground part (L50-52 in Page 3), but almost the same description was existed in
discussion part (L143-149, in Page 9). 
The author's consideration was much mentioned in case presentation part (e.g.
L67-68 in Page 4, L83-86 in Page 5) and some of them were duplicated with the
consideration in latter discussion part.
You need to select a suitable part section and clarify the issue what you want to
argue in this case report. 
There was no description of the location and histological type of esophageal
cancer. Could the tumor characteristics affect the length of the remnant
esophagus in this case? 
Although the authors explained the cause of the EBF in this case to be ischemia
occurring at the distal end of the esophagus, I think that the interval from surgery
to ischemic change was too long. Did this patient have no symptoms, such as
fever, for 4 months from the first discharge to the onset of EBF? Because
esophageal erosion was healed by treatment with proton pump inhibitor, I think
that severe reflux esophagitis also could be attributed to occurrence of the EBF
in this case. 
Development of neovasculation between remnant esophagus and gastric tube
was necessary in this surgical treatment strategy. If the authors describe the
evidence of expected period until the neovasculation is formed, this would be
more helpful report for other clinicians suffering from treatment of EBF after
esophagectomy. 
I hope these comments will be helpful for the improvement of the article.
Publons Reviewer Recognition
. Springer Nature can send verification of this
review directly to Publons (a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would
like to take advantage of this service, please click on the “Yes” option below.
Your name, email address, title of the reviewed manuscript, name of the journal,
and date of your review submission (the “Review Data”) will then be transmitted
to Publons after the final decision on the manuscript has been made. If you have
already registered at Publons, they will notify you of the receipt of this review
and update your profile 
as per your settings and their policy. If you are not
registered with Publons, you will receive an email from them asking you to
register in order for them to be able to recognize your review on your new
profile page. Publons may use the Review Data to generate derivative metadata
for the benefit of Publons and you as a reviewer, carefully considering the
sensitivity of such information. For example, Publons may verify your record as
a reviewer by updating your profile published on its webservice if you have
registered for such service or help editors to identify candidate reviewers. Please
find the details of processing in Publons’ privacy policy
https://publons.com/about/terms
Yes
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.
Reviewer Publication Consent.
 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
) if this manuscript is accepted for
publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the published
report have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not
be published.
If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the
editorial office before completing the review.
If you wish, you can include your
name in your published report. Please note you must decide whether to include
your name at the start of the process and confirm this decision whenever
prompted. If you change your decision later, we will not be able to publish your
name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please 
do not
 publish my name
with my report. (default)
Is the study design appropriate to answer the research question (including the use
of appropriate controls), and are the conclusions supported by the evidence
presented?
Yes
Are the methods sufficiently described to allow the study to be repeated?
Yes
Is the use of statistics and treatment of uncertainties appropriate?
Yes
Is the presentation of the work clear?
Yes
Are the images in this manuscript (including electrophoretic gels and blots) free
from apparent manipulation?
Yes