Review for 10.1186/s12876-021-01603-0 (2021)

Reviewer’s report
Title: 
May chronic cough in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease be a
contraindication of Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy placement: a case
report
Version: 
4 
Date: 
19 May 2020
Reviewer's report:
This is a fluently written report on a case of interest to surgeons and
gastroenterologists.
I do agree with the authors conclusion.
I have three questions that I suggest the authors to address:
1) The details of the PEG method used in this report is missing. The PEG can be
performed by a pull or push technique. Was there an endoscopic control at the
end of the operative intervention? Were the operating surgeons sure that the
gastric part of the PEG tube was inside the stomach?
2) Complications occurring within 30 days are usually classified as operative
complications, according to Clavian Dindo. Was the complication a
postoperative complication or due the patient's pulmonary problem only?
3) Why was the second operative intervention conducted by the same method as
the first? Was there any discussion on using open or laparoscopy assisted
methods instead?
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.
No
Does the work include the necessary controls?
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the
authors.
No
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
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 publish my name with my
report.