Review for 10.1186/s12876-019-0997-x (2019)

Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Feasibility of ambulatory surgery for anal fistu la with LIFT procedure  
 
Version: 0 Date: 02 Apr 2019  
 
Reviewer: Hitoshi Kameyama  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
In the  manuscript entitled "Feasibility of ambulatory surgery for anal fistula with LIFT 
procedure" the authors described the efficacy of ambulatory surgery for anal fistula.  
I read your document with interest. Please refer to the following comment.  
The indica tion of ambulatory surgery or inpatient surgery is unclear. You used a visual analogue 
scale as postoperative pain evaluation. When did you investigate the VAS evaluation? I think the 
evaluation of pain is difficult if its point is not constant because the  anesthesia approaches were 
different in two groups.  
To summarize, this retrospective study is surgical procedure selection is unclear. Moreover, you 
showed that in the ambulatory surgery group, pain score was worse, and postoperative 
complications were n ot less compared to the inpatient surgery group. I think that higher 
satisfaction in ambulatory surgery group is due to an early return to work. Therefore, I think 
these results do not indicate the safety of ambulatory LIFT surgery for anal fistula.  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Unable to assess  
 
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 adequa tely supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
  
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.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
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 publ ication 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 cur rently 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 an y 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 ac cepted 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://creativecommo ns.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