Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-5-18 (2005)

Reviewer's report 
 A conscious mouse model of gastric ileus using clinically relevant endpoints. Title: 
 1  8 October 2004 Version: Date: 
 Yvette Tache Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
1. Result section includes the experimental protocols for each study and measurements. It would be 
better to include this information within the method section by adding an paragraph on experimental 
protocols covering the various treatments and measurements for each experiment with headline for 
each experiment. (for instance P. 8 1st paragraph, first 4 sentences; 2nd paragraph, first 4 
sentences; p. 9 2nd paragraph, first 7 sentences). 2. Description of the results may involve a more quantitative information to characterize the magnitude of peak response with values included in the result section. This will be important to 
compare the various treatments used. 
3. In view of the various challenges used to produce inhibition of food intake and inhibition of gastric/colonic motor function ranging from immune challenge (LPS, ceruleine), visceral manipulation (surgery), somatic pain (burn) that involves a stress reaction, the discussion should 
address this component that can play a role since CRF receptors have been involved in various 
stress related inhibition of food intake and gastric emptying (Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2003 
Aug;24(8):421-7). 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) p. 4, 3rd paragraph: l. 2 food, fecal and mouse mass was measured every 12 h. There is no clear 
information how this was achieved. Does fecal output was weighted at the end of 12 h and the 
number of pellet counted? Mass indicates rather a weight measure as shown in Fig. 2B. However over 12 h there is evaporation of the fluid content of the feces that may interfere with the accurate estimation of the mass particularly in the LPS treatment that may induce diarrhea(Gut. 2002 
Oct;51(4):522-8). 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the 
author can be trusted to correct) 
p. 6 gastric emptying: total dye administered by used to calculate the gastric emptying. What the total
amount determined before gavage? Methods used to calculate the total amount of dye in the 
stomach generally involve euthanizing 2-3 animals immediately after the gavage of the marker and 
processing the stomach similarly as in animals euthanized 30 min later. It is not clear whether this procedure was used to determine the total amount of dye administered. p. 9 2nd sentence it is not clear whether the description of the data relates to the fig. 1 or 2 A. 
p. 9 2nd paragraph: LPS is known to induce diarrhea, what this observed through the various doses 
of LPS used? p. 12, l. 2 the gastric blood flow cannot been inferred from mean arterial blood pressure; there are autonomic changes that can induce increase in systemic blood pressure and decrease in gastric 
vascular resistance and increase gastric mucosal blood flow (central TRH injection). 
Discussion. As LPS is known to increase watery secretion in mice (Gut. 2002 Oct;51(4):522-8), the 
inhibitory response observed here may be commented in relation with differences in strain used or 
other conditions. 
p. 14, l. 11 there is also evidence that LPS-induced inhibition of food intake in mice is correlated with the inhibition of the orexigenic and motility promoting peptide ghrelin (Neurosci Lett. 2003 May 29;343(1):25-8). 
Figure 1 does not show points at which there is statistical difference between groups. 
Figs 1 and 2. should indicate the significance of thicker lines on the abscisse. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article of importance in its field Level of interest: 
 Acceptable Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
None below