Review for 10.1186/s12876-021-01941-z (2021)

Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Characteristics of Endoscopic and Pathological Findings of Amebic
Colitis
Version: 
0 
Date: 
26 Apr 2021
Reviewer's report:
Please include all comments for the authors in this box rather than uploading
your report as an attachment. Please only upload as attachments annotated
versions of manuscripts, graphs, supporting materials or other aspects of your
report which cannot be included in a text format.
Please overwrite this text when adding your comments to the authors.
This is a nice report of a clinical series of patients with amebic colitis diagnosed
by colonoscopy and histology in a Chinese population in a referral hospital in
Beijing. 
It adds to the literature on the clinical manifestations and endocopic
features of amebic colitis seen by clinicians in various countries. 
Limitations are
noted. Some recent references on amebiasis are included. 
There are some
illustrative endoscopic photos.
Major comments -
English usage could be improved throughout the manuscript. 
Some expressions
could be shortened, e.g. features of endoscopic findings could be just endoscopic
findings, and lesions of erosions and ulcers could be just erosions and ulcers.
It would probably be helpful to clinicians to have an up to date discussion on
current therapy for amebic colitis. 
Only metronidazole is mentioned and the dose
may vary in different countries.
Minor comments -
Some words have inconsistent spelling, mainly cecum and amebic.
Abstract and text - clarify the comment that, no crypt abscesses were observed in
all cases. 
Does this mean that crypt abscesses were not seen?
Methods - clarify that no ELISA stool antigen or PCR tests were used.
Results - It is interesting that stool for ova and parasites was never positive. 
Is
there any possible explanation. 
This is addressed in the discussion as low
sensitivity.
Endoscopic features - Rectal findings could be characterized as rectal
involvement.
Treatment - The sentence is awkward. 
It could be rephrased as something like,
All patients initially diagnosed with IBD were treated with mesalazine, but this
was not effective for any of the patients.
Discussion - No cases of fulminant colitis or amebic liver abscess were found. 
It
would help to add some comments about the association of colitis and amebic
liver abscess in prior series of patients.
What would be the source of selection bias in these cases of amebic colitis.
The authors could comment on Entamoeba dispar vs. Entamoeba histolytica
Consider making a table listing age, sex, 
presenting symptoms and possibly
endoscopic findings in the 16 patients
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
No
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