Review for 10.1186/s12876-020-01215-0 (2020)

Reviewer’s report
Title: Direct endoscopic full-thickness resection for submucosal tumors with an intraluminal growth
pattern originating from the muscularis propria layer in the gastric fundus
Version: 0 Date: 11 Oct 2019
Reviewer: Shigetaka Yoshinaga
Reviewer's report:
This paper describes the efficacy of direct endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) for submucosal
tumors with an intraluminal growth pattern originating from the muscularis propria layer in the gastric
fundus.
I enjoyed reading this paper. However, there are some problems to be resolved. 
Major comments
1. The primary outcome of this study was complete resection rate. However, there was no definition of
"complete resection". Although the complete resection should be evaluated pathologically, the authors
might evaluate endoscopically. I think it was not "complete resection" but "en-bloc resection". The
authors should re-evaluate pathologically and precisely.
2. The authors mentioned this direct EFTR was cost-effective. However, there was no description of
evidences. They should calculate the cost of the direct EFTR and compare with that of the traditional
EFTR, and show us evidences.
3. In "Discussion", the authors described "this technique can make sure the tumor intact capsule and
avoid the damage of the tumor during the dissection". How did they confirm?
4. The authors should prepare a table of characteristics of patients.
Minor comments
1. There were some simple mistakes. (e.g. "endocopic" in the title) Please ask a native English speaker
to check this manuscript and correct them.
2. The periods of this study were deferent between in the "Abstract" and in the "Methods"
3. In "Results", please make sure the words "gastric stromal tumor".
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.
Yes
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