JerMa88/BMC_Gastroenterology_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0233-2 (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Endoscopic Inside stent placement is suitable as a bridging treatment for
preoperative biliary tract cancer
Version:3Date:27 July 2014
Reviewer: Toshio Tsuyuguchi
Reviewer's report:
Major
#1: Stent diameter is an important risk factor for stent obstruction. In patients with
inside group, 8.5Fr stent is used more frequently than 7Fr. On the contrary, 7Fr
stent is generally used in patients with conventional group. Authors should add
stent diameter data on risk factors (7Fr or more) for stent obstruction (Table 7).
#2: In conventional group, 4 patients without chemotherapy had long
preoperative period more than 60 days. Surprisingly, case 6 period is 448 days.
These cases are uncommon. Is there any selection bias that was not described
in this article?
Minor
#3: It is difficult to remove migrated inside-stents in patients with intact duodenal
papilla. It’s a weakness of inside-stent.
#4: “sphincter of Odd”
#5: English correction is necessary.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests' below.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0233-2 (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Endoscopic Inside stent placement is suitable as a bridging treatment for
preoperative biliary tract cancer
Version:4Date:5 November 2014
Reviewer: Jong Ho Moon
Reviewer's report:
Authors present a innovative concept in biliary plastic stents for preoperative
biliary drainage. It seems that the stent can be also applied in other conditions in
addition to preoperative drainage. The manuscript is well revised.
Minor point
1. There are previous studies about inside metallic biliary stents. Please, add
discussion and reference.
Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 May;75(5):1080-5
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0233-2 (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Endoscopic Inside stent placement is suitable as a bridging treatment for
preoperative biliary tract cancer
Version:4Date:5 November 2014
Reviewer: Hirotoshi Ishiwatari
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
Authors did not reply most of my questions sufficiently. At least, authors have to
include ICC cases and the cases who were performed percutaneous drainage
after endoscopic treatment and exclude the cases who were undertaken EST
before insertion of inside stent.
In the reply for my question (2), your reply was difference from the manuscript.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0233-2 (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Endoscopic Inside stent placement is suitable as a bridging treatment for
preoperative biliary tract cancer
Version:4Date:5 November 2014
Reviewer: Toshio Tsuyuguchi
Reviewer's report:
Authors responded my questions point by point. Thank you for your corporation.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0237-y (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Co-occurrence of IBS and symptoms of anxiety or depression, among
Norwegian twins, is influenced by both heredity and intrauterine growth
Version:2Date:15 October 2014
Reviewer: Oreste PIeramico
Reviewer's report:
This study deals with the hypothesis that intrauterine and genetic factors may
influence the co-occurrence of IBS and symptoms of anxiety and depression.
The authors, who have already large experience in that field of research, studied
a population of Norwegian twins assessing symptoms by means of appropriate
self-reported questionnaire responses.
I have no major objections about this paper: the subject of the study is very
important and of interest in the field of a better understanding of the central
mechanisms underlying disfunctions of the brain-gut axis; the hypothesis is well
formulated and the investigation is well conducted. The number of investigated
subjects as well the analysis of data is appropriate. Finally, the discussion is well
focused on data and on results of previous studies.
Minor revisions:
The authors should check if data reported on Table 1 are concordant with data
exposed in Materials and methods (page 4, lines 65-70)
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0237-y (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Co-occurrence of IBS and symptoms of anxiety or depression, among
Norwegian twins, is influenced by both heredity and intrauterine growth
Version:2Date:29 October 2014
Reviewer: Ji Won Kim
Reviewer's report:
Comment to the Editor/Authors
2014-09-20
General
The current study “Co-occurrence of IBS and symptoms of anxiety or depression,
among Norwegian twins, is influenced by both heredity and intrauterine growth”
touched the possible pathogenesis of IBS in patients who had co-morbidity IBS
and anxiety/depression.
This study is interesting because what has rarely been studied IBS and mental
health outcome in twin patients. However, there are several points that are
further clearly delineated.
I have comments as follows:
Abstract
1. In the line 13-14,, “with anxiety (181.0 g, p<0.0001) and depression (249.9 g,
p<0.0001)’ # In this phrase, the mean of 181.0g and 249.9 g is not clear, this is
better to add (average birth weight difference 181.0 g, p<0.0001).
Introduction
1. In the line 53-55, authors described that “family factors comprise genetic factor
and/or early familial influence associated with being raised as twins in the same
household”. In my opinion, genetic factor is different from early familial influence,
and so it may need to clarify that how the authors differentiated genetic factor
and early familial influence.
Materials and Methods
1. Anxiety and depression is well known that they are very associates with
socio-economic condition of the patients, such as marital status, education and
other co-morbid disease. Are there any differences in the marital status (married
or not married or divorced) or education status (high school or university or
graduate) or co-morbid disease (diabetes, hypertension et al) in the Case and
Control?
Results
1. In the line 204-208, the meaning is confusing, and it may clearly describe that
cases of IBS with anxiety were more likely to have comorbid long-lasting muscle
pain, but cases of IBS with depression did not reach significance.
Discussion
1. In this study, there were no data about the current environmental state that
influence the IBS, anxiety, and depression, such as marital, educational,
occupational, and medical state. These are one of limitations of this study.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0234-1 (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Cap assisted colonoscopy for the detection of serrated polyps
Version:4Date:21 November 2014
Reviewer: Joep IJspeert
Reviewer's report:
The authors have answered all my initial revisions in a proper fashion. I have no
further comments or questions.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0226-6 (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:A randomized controlled trial of endoscopic steroid injection for prophylaxis
of esophageal stenoses after extensive endoscopic submucosal dissection
Version:1Date:25 July 2014
Reviewer: Hendrik Manner
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors,
this is a very interesting paper on an important issue.
There is only two minor comments:
The case number for final analysis was obviously not reached (should have been
16 per group). Please comment on this in the Discussion section, because it
weakens the validity of the study.
Also, some endoscopic images would be fine.
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
none
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0226-6 (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:A randomized controlled trial of endoscopic steroid injection for prophylaxis
of esophageal stenoses after extensive endoscopic submucosal dissection
Version:1Date:26 October 2014
Reviewer: mate knabe
Reviewer's report:
In the present manuscript the authors analyze the prophylactic effect of local
steroid injection, following extensive endoscopic submucosal dissection in the
esophagus. The main objective was to investigate the development of
esophageal stenosis with or without this prophylactic treatment. The study was
performed as a randomized controlled trial on 32 patients. In summary the
frequency of strictures was not significantly different between the two groups, but
the number of dilatation sessions required was significantly less in the steroid
group. Therefore, they concluded that prophylactic steroid treatment can reduce
the severity of strictures after extensive ESD in the esophagus.
The present study is well written and the study design was suitable to answer the
question, although the sample size was too small to answer some of the main
objectives.
There are some major compulsory points I would like to mention.
1) Pech Oliver et al recently published in Gastroenterology a study with over
1000 patients which proved that endoscopic mucosal resection is a safe
procedure with a very high rate of complete remission. Rates of esophageal
stenosis are much lower after EMR than after extensive ESD. Moreover this,
there was only one perforation in the whole study-population. The question is:
why perform ESD with risk for consecutive esophageal stenosis and the need of
dilatation, instead of using EMR? Please discuss these facts in your manuscript.
2) In table number 2 there are 3 carcinomas with deeper submucosal invasion
(sm2). These patients have a relevant risk to develop lymphoid metastasis. Why
wasn’t surgery performed? Please comment on this.
No minor comments
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0226-6 (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:A randomized controlled trial of endoscopic steroid injection for prophylaxis
of esophageal stenoses after extensive endoscopic submucosal dissection
Version:2Date:15 November 2014
Reviewer: Hendrik Manner
Reviewer's report:
Accept
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
none
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0226-6 (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:A randomized controlled trial of endoscopic steroid injection for prophylaxis
of esophageal stenoses after extensive endoscopic submucosal dissection
Version:2Date:25 November 2014
Reviewer: mate knabe
Reviewer's report:
No further questions
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0228-z (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Intestinal and neuronal myenteric adaptations in the small intestine induced
by a high-fat diet in mice
Version:1Date:15 July 2014
Reviewer: Shanthi Srinivasan
Reviewer's report:
In this interesting paper the authors assess the changes in the myenteric plexus
in the small intestine in mice fed a high fat diet for 8 weeks. They find t several
changes in intestinal morphology, myenteric neurons and specific neuronal
subtypes including nitregic neurons and VIP neurons. The findings are interesting
as the authors clearly characterize the changes in the neuronal innervation in
various segments of the small intestine.
1. Is the question posed by the authors well defined? Yes
2. Are the methods appropriate and well described? Yes
3. Are the data sound? Yes
4. Does the manuscript adhere to the relevant standards for reporting and data
deposition? Yes
5. Are the discussion and conclusions well balanced and adequately supported
by the data?
6. Are limitations of the work clearly stated? Yes
7. Do the authors clearly acknowledge any work upon which they are building,
both published and unpublished? Yes
8. Do the title and abstract accurately convey what has been found? Yes
9. Is the writing acceptable? Yes
• Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use
of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct)
I have only one suggestion-the authors should update reference 26 to the
published version of the article- Nezami et al, Gastroenterology, 2013
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0228-z (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Intestinal and neuronal myenteric adaptations in the small intestine induced
by a high-fat diet in mice
Version:1Date:6 August 2014
Reviewer: Ulrikke Voss
Reviewer's report:
see attachment
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0230-5 (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Closure of iatrogenic large mucosal and full-thickness defects of the
stomach with endoscopic interrupted sutures in in vivo porcine models: Are they
durable enough?
Version:3Date:14 November 2014
Reviewer: Hideki Kobara
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer's report
Title: Closure of iatrogenic large mucosal and full-thickness defects of the
stomach with endoscopic interrupted sutures in in vivo porcine models: Are they
durable enough?
Version: 1 Date: 14 November 2014
Reviewer: Hideki Kobara
Reviewer's report:
There are few reports regarding endoluminal complete closure of full-thickness
gastric wall defects with use of an innovative endoscopic suturing device,
Overstitch. By using Overstitch, authors describe an amazing experience and
show outstanding knowledge of gastric endoscopic full-thickness resection
(EFTR), compared to stitching closure of large mucosal defects created by
endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the animal models. The result of this
study is excellent and suitable for multidisciplinary approaches, and leads to
further advances of minimally invasive endoscopic surgery.
Additionally, the strength of the present study can be evaluated for readers as
follows;
1. The design of EFTR procedure is very unique and interesting.
T-tag tissue apposition system creates a precise operation field, which prevents
the stomach from collapsing. It makes full-thickness suturing possible.
2. “Secondary closure success rate” of this one-week survival study is quite
interesting.
Although benefits of prophylactic closure for mucosal defects after colorectal
EMR are well-established, this result suggests that superficial gastric mucosal
stitching involves some limitations, which prevent delayed adverse events. The
reason is well-stated in the discussion section.
3. Histological examination of autopsy nicely reveals that serosal stitching is
durable and appropriate for EFTR. The reason is mentioned clearly and
reasonably in the discussion section “reduced by disrupting the muscular fibers
with EFTR, having a similar theory to Heller’s myotomy.”
However, I have several comments and criticisms as following.
Major
1) The reason of significant differences of median procedure time between ESD
and EFTR groups should be explained.
If some factors (the difficulty of maneuvering devices or technique, the number of
stitches, the degree of wall thickness, etc.) influence them, please mention it in
the discussion section.
2) Please describe about limitations or tasks for the achievement of EFTR by the
present methodology.
For example, add some information like this; “At present, EFTR with T-bar
anchors has a limited function regarding the location of stomach. This fact
indicates necessity of further developments to establish EFTR.”
Minor
1) Please correct careless mistakes.
The P-values of the mean maximum diameter in the Results section (p = 0.002),
and Table1 (p = 0.015) are different.
Level of interest: An exceptional article
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
None
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0229-y (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Characteristics and factors related to quality of life in Mexican Mestizo
patients with celiac disease.
Version:2Date:23 September 2014
Reviewer: Mercedes Pico
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
Title: Characteristics and factors related to quality of life in Mexican Mestizo
patients with celiac disease.
Karen Lizzete Ramírez-Cervantes MD, José María Remes-Troche MD, María del
Pilar Milke-García PhD, Viridiana Romero Nutr, ,Luis F Uscanga MD, FACG.
1: Study question and objectives are well posed and stated
2: The methods are well described and are appropriate for the nature of the
study, but in Page 5 line 118. : I think the writers have to describe more precisely,
how long "AFTER" starting the gluten-free diet the patients respond the EuroQol
5D ?, because to see changes in symptoms and other aspects of life would
require a few months on the diet.
3: Limitations are specific
4: Data presentation in Tables is complete
5 The discussion and conclusions are well balanced and adequately supported
by the data but the authors have to describe point 2.
6 The authors clearly acknowledge any work upon which they are building, both
published and unpublished
7 The title and abstract accurately convey what has been found
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
'I declare that I have no competing interests'
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0236-z (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Increased use of hypnotics in individuals with celiac disease: A nationwide
case-control study
Version:1Date:12 November 2014
Reviewer: Edward Bixler
Reviewer's report:
This study was based on a nationwide case-control sample from the Swedish
general population. The cases were defined as those with celiac disease based
on a biopsy showing villous atrophy compared to a matched sample of controls.
Insomnia was defined in both samples based on #2 prescriptions of hypnotics.
The authors conclude that patients with celiac disease have an increased risk for
insomnia and that insomnia may be a manifestation of celiac disease.
This study is addressing an interesting question. The sample and analysis
appear to be well defined and appropriate. They do not have a direct assessment
of insomnia, relying on hypnotic prescription as a surrogate. Thus labeling this
outcome as insomnia may be overstating the data. Perhaps a label of poor sleep
or sleep complaint might be more consistent with the data.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0227-0 (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Stromal expression of miR-21 in T3-4a colorectal cancer is an independent
predictor of early tumor relapse
Version:1Date:31 July 2014
Reviewer: manuela gariboldi
Reviewer's report:
Authors investigate miR-21 expression in advanced CRC and evaluated its
correlation with markers of progression in 277 T3/T4a patients. The question
posed is well defined. As stated in the introduction, it is already known that
expression of miR-21 is directly correlated with tumor progression, poor survival
and response to chemotherapy in CRC. Also predominant expression of this
miRNA in the tumor surrounding tissue has been already shown. Their results
obtained by ISH of miR-21 on TMAs support what already found. Correlation of
miR-21 levels with clinical variables confirms its higher expression in advanced
cancers. In addition, authors found that miR-21 expression is inversely correlated
with that of E-cadherin but directly related with that of MTA1. Interestingly miR-21
expression was linked to shorter disease free survival only for colon and not for
rectal cancer. Finally, its expression was lower in stage II cases with shorter
RFS. This result was not confirmed in Stage III cases.
Methods are appropriate and well described.
Major Compulsory Revisions
Authors should better discuss the differences in RFS observed between stage II
and stage III cases and among colon and rectal cancers.
Minor Essential Revisions
figure 1B: there is a typo error: insert and not inset
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/s12876-015-0227-0 (2015)

Reviewer's report
Title:Stromal expression of miR-21 in T3-4a colorectal cancer is an independent
predictor of early tumor relapse
Version:1Date:20 October 2014
Reviewer: Alessio Naccarati
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript by Kyung Kang et al reports the expression levels of miR-21 in
277 advanced colorectal cancer patients in association with tumor progression
and the expression of MTA1 and E-cadherin genes.
The study is quite interesting, the design appropriate and the outcomes clearly
presented.
There are only some aspects to be clarified/improved. In particular several
sentences should be reformulated and language improved.
Major Compulsory Revision
The authors should consider whether other possible methodologies could be
used to detect simultaneously miR-21 expression levels by a quantitative
methods. Or at least trying to investigate if in online available CRC database
(TCGA) is possible to retrieve similar data and compare the results.
More references related to miR-21 and CRC, with particular emphasis to
progression, could be retreived and discussed..
Minor Essential Revisions
Abstract
Line 22: there is no straight connection between the first and the second
sentence. MTA1 and E-cadherin should be introduced..
Line 43: conclusions should be reformulated..miR-21 is not regulated with the
expression of the two investigated genes…Maybe, better to write “related to”.
Among keywords, miR-21 and survival could be added.
Introduction
Line 53-54 which biomarkers? Maybe some examples and references could be
included.
Line 77: the whole sentence about ISH is not related to what previously
described and what follows. Additionally no reference is included..
Methods:
Line 107-108: what is actually a “microarray construction”? what does it mean
“We constructed tissue microarrays from FFPE”?
Line 147: two categories of what? I guess “expression “ is missing..
Results
Line 177: instead of “were” please replace with “that resulted significant”.
Discussion:
Line 217: replace however with “while”.
Line 220: tumor progression
Line 234: please reformulate the sentence removing “a single-institution…”..
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0224-8 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:The influence of astragalus polysaccharide and beta-elemene on LX-2 cell
growth, apoptosis and activation
Version:2Date:26 August 2014
Reviewer: Hua wang
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript by Ming-hui Yang’s group addressed the Single
use of astragalus polysaccharide (APS) or #-elemene (ELE) can inhibit LX-2 cell
proliferation and induce apoptosis. APS+ELE treatment showed higher efficiency
in inducing LX-2 cell apoptosis. The inhibition of mRNA and protein levels of
#-SMA and CD44 induced by TGF-# on LX-2 cells can explain the anti-fibrotic
effect of APS and ELE in treating liver diseases.
Overall, this is interesting research. Most of experiments in the study are
adequately designed and the methods section is adequately explained.
Appropriate references have been cited. However, there are some concerns as
listed below.
In the section of Results, the Schematic diagram illustrating the mechanism of
the whole story should be included.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0224-8 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:The influence of astragalus polysaccharide and beta-elemene on LX-2 cell
growth, apoptosis and activation
Version:2Date:5 September 2014
Reviewer: Ding-You Li
Reviewer's report:
See attachment
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests'
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0209-7 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Structural and functional consequences of buserelin-induced enteric
neuropathy in rat
Version:1Date:10 October 2014
Reviewer: Bridget Southwell
Reviewer's report:
Busrelin and enteric neuropathy
MS: 1552626293142224
Structural and functional consequences of buserelin-induced enteric neuropathy
in rat Elin Sand, Bodil Roth, Björn Weström, Peter Bonn, Eva Ekblad and Bodil
Ohlsson BMC Gastroenterology
Review of revision 1.
The authors have greatly improved the manuscript and answered the questions.
There are some small editing changes. I would like to see the manuscript again
after these changes
Page 2- abstact. The results for VAChT are not in the results now. So this should
be removed from the abstract line 42.
Page 7 line 129- what does ‘x R x’ mean?
Page 12 line 250. Add ’Analyis of’ before ‘antibodies’
Page 14 line 308-. Figure 1 shows Submucosal ganglia and then myenteric
ganglia. Change the order in the text or figure so that they are the same.
Page 14 line 311. Says the loss of neurons in the myenteric ganglia was greater
than in the submucosal ganglia. But there was a reduction of 61% in colon
submosal neurons. As this is larger, change text to say ‘loss of neurons in the
colonic submucosal ganglia was greater than in the myenteric ganglia’.
Page 15- there are no results for VAChT now. If they are not included remove the
antibody information from the abstract and methods. Or add results.
Page 17 lines 359 to 362-‘However in a complementary study....(unpublished
data)’. Add this data to results and methods. You can’t add data into the
discussion.
Page 18 line 380- VACht is listed here but not in results- add to results or delete
here
Page 25 line 532- delete ‘s’ from ‘indicates’
Page 25 line 536- change ‘magnification bar’ to ‘scale bar’, delete ‘in micrograph
(j)’
Page 33- table 2- you have combined saline and busrelin treated rat data in this
table. This is awkward as the aim is to show they are the same. Make this clear
in the heading- change to ‘Nerve fiber density and distribution in colon was
identical in saline and busrelin-treated rats’.
Page 33- table 2 line 778 and 780. Move last sentence and add to end of
sentence in line 778 to read ‘...in colon of saline- and busrelin-treated rats are
shown combined as no differences in nerve fibre.....’.
Figure 2- shows high numbers of NOS neurons in the submucosal ganglia and
very few SP neurons. There are no NOS nerve fibers in the mucosa but many SP
nerve fibers in the mucosa and many SP neurons in the SG. Is this data correct
or miss labelled?
Figure 3. the text in the scale bar is not readable. Make it larger or leave it out.
The text can go above the scale bar in white.
Figure 5- galactose is misspelt.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0197-7 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Randomised, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial of Oral Budesonide for
Prophylaxis of Acute Intestinal Graft-versus-Host Disease after Allogeneic Stem
Cell Transplantation ( PROGAST)
Version:2Date:23 October 2013
Reviewer: Martin Gramatzki
Reviewer's report:
This study is clearly structured. However, the authors should have outlined the
incidence, severity and particularly the treatment of acute GvHD besides the
gastrointestinal tract involvement. It is very likely that acute GvHD such as of the
skin or the liver has occurred in a substantial number of patients, partly also
leading to systemic immunosuppression. This could have strongly influenced the
incidence and degree of intestinal GvHD and thereby the outcome of the study.
If, as indicated, the rate of infectious complications was higher in the budesonide
group, it would be of interest if there is a correlation with the degree of GvHD in
those patients receiving immunosuppression.
Another important aspect would be whether infectious complications especially of
the intestinal tract have been found more frequently in the budesonide group
than in the placebo group.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0198-6 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Effect of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells on hepatic fibrosis
in a thioacetamide-induced cirrhotic rat model
Version:3Date:10 June 2014
Reviewer: Jonel Trebicka
Reviewer's report:
The authors have analyzed the role of BM-MSC in the regression of fibrosis.
They injected human BM-MSC directly intrahepatically and could show a
decrease in fibrosis after two injections.
major comments:
1. the topic is not novel and the methods used neither. However, it confirms that
BM-MSC might play a role in the therapy of fibrosis. Indeed several points need
to be adressed before publication. On my opinion more efforts should be
invested in the analysis of fibroslysis. what happens to the different MMPs and
TIMPs, etc.
2. Teh model of TAA in rats with i.p. injections sounds difficult, however the
authros show severe fibrosis. do the rats develop ascites?
3. what did the control group receive? the control groups should also receive a
cellular suspension
4. did the authros used analog liver segments for hydroxy prolin? which
segemnts, where teh injection is? this must be clear
5. where did the BM-MSC end up? teh authros should stain the livers for human
antigens and analyze their location
6. what happens to the laboratory tests and blood tests? did the authors noticed
more inflammatory inflitrates in teh liver?
minor comments:
1. the basal data as liver weight, body weight, spleen weight etc must be shown
2. the laboratory data (liver and blood) should be shown
3. the Spleen and other orgens should be analyze to see whtehr the cells migrate
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
no competing interest
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0198-6 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Effect of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells on hepatic fibrosis
in a thioacetamide-induced cirrhotic rat model
Version:3Date:16 June 2014
Reviewer: Jung-Hwan Yoon
Reviewer's report:
The authors reported the therapeutic potential of human bone marrow-derived
mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs) on hepatic fibrosis in a cirrhotic rat model.
The experiments were well done, and MSCs-based cytotherapy showed
promising results; however, a few issues are still remaining to be clarified for
accepting the conclusion.
- Major Compulsory Revisions
1. It is not certain whether the effect of human BM-MSCs on hepatic fibrosis is
induced by engraftment of transplanted cells and differentiation into hepatocytes.
The authors need to show in vivo cell tracking of injected cells, and in vitro data
showing differentiation of BM-MSCs into hepatocytes may be also required. If it is
not possible, please explain the reason.
2. The authors described that “BM-MSCs modulated the TGF-#1/Smad signaling
pathway by attenuating TGF-#1 and Smad3 expression and inhibiting Smad3
phosphorylation.” However, definite mechanism underlying the suppression of
TGF-#1/Smad signaling is not clearly explained in the manuscript. In fact,
attenuation of TGF-#1/Smad pathway could be the results of decreased fibrosis,
rather than the cause.
3. In the “Histological and immunohistochemical analysis” paragraph of results
section, data about #-SMA immunohistochemistry was not presented.
- Minor Essential Revisions
1. Definition of G1, G2, and G3 should be described.
2. It would be better to show the mean value of Laennec fibrosis score of each
group.
3. MSCs were directly injected into the right lobe of the fibrotic liver. Did the
authors perform experiments using tissue nearby the injection site only (i.e. right
lobe) or the whole liver? Was the anti-fibrotic effect of BM-MSCs also observed in
the left lobe?
- Discretionary Revisions
None
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0198-6 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Effect of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells on hepatic fibrosis
in a thioacetamide-induced cirrhotic rat model
Version:4Date:9 August 2014
Reviewer: Jonel Trebicka
Reviewer's report:
The authors answered sufficiently my comments.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
no competing interest
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0199-5 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Different therapeutic approaches on quality of life in patients with
inflammatory bowel disease
Version:1Date:6 September 2014
Reviewer: Zhixiang Zuo
Reviewer's report:
The authors re-validated the IBDQ in Mainland Chinese, which is necessary due
to the differences in geographic regions and high speed of westernization in
Mainland China. The manuscript is well-designed and well-written. The authors
performed a solid statistical analysis to prove the validity and reliability of
adapted IBDQ in Mainland Chinese. Moreover, the authors evaluated the IFX
therapy in IBD patients. The result is well-displayed and the explanation is
interesting and convincing.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0199-5 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Different therapeutic approaches on quality of life in patients with
inflammatory bowel disease
Version:1Date:18 September 2014
Reviewer: Wojciech Blonski
Reviewer's report:
Below please you will find my review of the manuscript MS: 3637532121378106
for BMC Gastroenterology
Comments to the Authors:
The Authors validated the Chinese translation of the IBD Questionnaire and
observed that infliximab improved health related quality of life when compared to
non-infliximab group.
This original study has been well designed and apropriate statistical methods
were used.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-180 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Long Intestinal Tube Splinting Prevent Postoperative Adhesive Small Bowel
Obstruction in Sclerosing Encapsulating Peritonitis
Version:3Date:23 October 2013
Reviewer: Johannes Jeekel
Reviewer's report:
.The study concerns a small number of patients .In the abstract it is mentioned
that there are two groups, a simple enterolysis group and a tube splinting group.
This can not be found in the method or result section of the article
.A major problem is that in the methods there is not a good definition of SEP and
it is not all described how SEP is diagnosed and whether SEP patients were in
fact diagnosed and part of the patient population. It seems from the method and
result section that there are no SEP patients involved in the study.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-180 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Long Intestinal Tube Splinting Prevent Postoperative Adhesive Small Bowel
Obstruction in Sclerosing Encapsulating Peritonitis
Version:3Date:2 November 2013
Reviewer: Fausto Catena
Reviewer's report:
nice paper, accept without revisions
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-180 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Long Intestinal Tube Splinting Prevent Postoperative Adhesive Small Bowel
Obstruction in Sclerosing Encapsulating Peritonitis
Version:3Date:8 November 2013
Reviewer: Marica Galati
Reviewer's report:
Mayor Compulsory Revisions
I think this is a very interesting manuscript about a rare disease such as SEP.
The paper offers good discussion about differential diagnosis of intestinal
obstruction. Indeed is very important to have awareness of this condition as a
possible etiological factor in order to facilitate pre-operative diagnosis, prevent
inadvertent bowel damage at laparoscopy and unnecessary bowel resection at
laparotomy.
Although the clinical relevance is unquestionable, perhaps the statistical
significance of the findings is lacking. Indeed long intestinal tube splinting was
performed in 33 patients in addition to the excision of the fibrotic membrane,
while only 11 patients received simple adhesiolysis. There is a low probability of
detecting a significant difference between the mentioned study groups, since the
researchers would need a sample size of at least 28-30 patients in the control
arm, to show clear benefits to the individual receiving the additional treatment.
Finding an accurate sample, is one of the biggest problems facing those
attempting research.
The direct relationship between sample size and power is critical to interpreting
the conclusions that can be deduced from a study[1].
The failure to detect a clinically important difference between 2 groups can occur
as the result of inadequate sample size [2-3]. This occurrence is more likely in
studies involving rare events, but it can also be a hindrance to studies involving
more common events.
Obviously the incidence of SEP is so rare that it would be almost impossible to
find a sample population large enough to attain statistically significant results.
Furthermore this is a retrospective study.
In my opinion we should not focus on P values alone to decide whether a
treatment is clinically useful, but we have to take in account both the clinical and
the statistical significance of the findings.
However it would be a mistake to conclude, just because the study has the
largest number of patients and the longer follow-up compared with previously
published papers, that we can draw strong conclusions about efficacy of tube
splinting in preventing ASBO in SEP patients.
Discretionary Revisions
It is not clear the reasoning according to which the surgeons decided to use or
not tube splinting.
1. Sheps S Sample size and power J Invest Surg 1993;6469- 475
2. Phillips WCScott JABlasczcynski G The significance of “no siginificance”: what
a negative statistical test really means AJR Am J Roentgenol 1983;141203- 206
3. Javitt JC When does the failure to find a difference mean that there is none?
Arch Ophthalmol 1989;1071034- 1040
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-180 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Long Intestinal Tube Splinting Prevent Postoperative Adhesive Small Bowel
Obstruction in Sclerosing Encapsulating Peritonitis
Version:4Date:30 May 2014
Reviewer: Marica Galati
Reviewer's report:
The incidence of SEP is so rare that it would be almost impossible to
find a sample population large enough to attain statistically significant results.
However, in my opinion it would be a mistake to conclude, just because the study
has the largest number of patients and the longer follow-up compared with
previously published papers, that we can draw strong conclusions about efficacy
of tube splinting in preventing ASBO in SEP patients.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Declaration of competing interests:
I have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-180 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Long Intestinal Tube Splinting Prevent Postoperative Adhesive Small Bowel
Obstruction in Sclerosing Encapsulating Peritonitis
Version:4Date:4 June 2014
Reviewer: Johannes Jeekel
Reviewer's report:
The authors have now rewritten the article according to the critical reviews
No further modifications are necessary
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0202-1 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Liver regeneration: Immunohistochemichal study of intrinsic hepatic
innervation after partial hepatectomy in rats.
Version:2Date:17 September 2014
Reviewer: Yuki Ohya
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
In this article, the authors evaluated the neural sprouting after partial
hepatectomy using immunohistochemistory of PGP9.5 and GAP-43. These data
might be helpful to researchers in this field, because the authors evaluated the
expression of neural makers PGP9.5 and GAP43 at several time points after PH.
However, the major issue is that there are few new findings here. And, figures
and tables should be organized.
1. Figure 1 and Figure 2 can be combined.
2. Table 2 and Figure 3 show the similar results.
3. Table 4 and Figure 6A show the similar results.
4. Table 3 and Figure 6B show the similar results.
5. “PTs(+)/total PTs %” in the in Table 1 should be written more precisely, or the
results can be expressed in a figure as in like Figure 6B.
6. Are the magnifications of Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 4 40X? Is this correct?
7. Although figure title of figure 5 has “40X”, Figure 5 has “10X”. Since this is
confusing, that should be corrected. Or, size bars might be useful in the figures.
Are these magnifications correct?
Minor Essential Revisions
1. “arrow heads” in legend of Figure 5 should be “arrows”.
2. There is a spelling mistake in “diefferences” (Page 7 Line 233)
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0202-1 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Liver regeneration: Immunohistochemichal study of intrinsic hepatic
innervation after partial hepatectomy in rats.
Version:2Date:19 September 2014
Reviewer: Shintaro Yagi
Reviewer's report:
Kandiis et al. reported the regeneration of the hepatic innervation after partial
hepatectomy. The manuscript is well written and the report of the regeneration of
the innervation in the regenerating liver is rare but important.
Major Compulsory Revisions
1. Is there any relevance between regeneration of innervation and the liver
regenelation such as liver weight (%SLV), Ki67 of the hepatocytes etc.
2. Please discuss the role of the hepatic innervation.Is there any phigiological
parameter regarding regeneration of the hepatic innervation?
3. In the discussion section (P8, L252), it is difficult to mention that the peak of
the GAP-43 was at 3 month, because the interval of the measured point is too
long.
4. Please mention clearly what is the "control group" (P7 L206).
5. Why the regeneration of the innervation was stopped at 6m after hepatectomy,
even the PTs (+)/total PTs(%) was only 56,33.
Minor Essential Revisions
1. Figure 1 and 2, Figure 4 and 5 should be combined.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0195-9 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:High-saturated fat diet delays diethylnitrosamine-induced hepatocellular
carcinoma
Version:7Date:21 August 2014
Reviewer: ALEXANDER WREE
Reviewer's report:
Reviewer’s comment:
The manuscript by Duan et al. has been significantly improved during the review
process. Improvement was demonstrated through the inclusion of the
macroscopic and microscopic liver images. However, the manuscript still remains
rather descriptive and as authors did not properly address questions raised in the
review process no improvement was achieved on the goal to provide convincing
mechanistic support of the reported findings.
Minor comments and errata
Table 1: Values for TC, TG, HDL-C, LDL-C are not in line with the rest of the
table.
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests