JerMa88/BMC_Gastroenterology_Peer_Reviews huggingface dataset:
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0207-9 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Intestinal Capillariasis in the 21st Century: Clinical Presentations and Role
of Endoscopy and Imaging
Version:2Date:21 October 2014
Reviewer: Siew Ng
Reviewer's report:
The authors performed a retrospective review of medical records of 26 patients
diagnosed with intestinal capillariasis at a secondary and tertiary hospital in
Bangkok. They reported the clinical characteristics and investigation steps for
disease diagnosis.
The paper is well written and it presents a rare but unique condition that
may lead to malabsorption in endemic areas, and provide investigation options
and management strategy. It will be useful to practising physicians.
It will be useful to propose an investigation and management algorithm to
understand the optimal sequence of events especially when selecting between
bariums studies, capsule endoscopy or more invasive tests such as balloon
assisted enteroscopy. Also what is the role of therapeutic trial of treatment when
diagnosis remains uncertain.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0214-x (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Lack of evidence of viral reactivation in HBsAg-negative HBcAb-positive
and HCV patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy for psoriasis.
Version:2Date:10 October 2014
Reviewer: Marco MP Picardi
Reviewer's report:
The reports on the impact of immunosuppressive therapy (in particular, biological
drugs) in patients with psoriasis and positivity for HBV and/or HCV serum
markers are scanty. The results of this study have clinical relevance.
There are some issues I would like to raise that needs further explanation:
Major revisions
1. This is a retrospective study. The sentence in the abstract (line 11) “patients
were consecutively enrolled” should be removed, as well as “consecutive” (line
10, abstract; and line 7, materials and methods).
2. More details, in the Material and Methods section and in the Discussion, on
the “periodic laboratoristic monitoring” should be added, i.e., baseline diagnostic
work-up with type of biochemical tests for viral status, and the scheduled medical
appointments for biochemical examinations during the immunosuppressive
therapy and during the follow-up.
3. From your explanations, it is not really sure what the definition of “Occult HBV
Infection” was? In the Results, “23/224 (10.2%) patients were isolated HBcAb
positive (OBI)”. But, in the Materials and Methods (lines, 24-3), “Occult HBV
infection (OBI) represents a particular clinical entity that is characterized by the
persistence of HBV DNA in the liver tissue, without the evidence of overt HBV
infection, in individuals who are HBsAg negative and HBcAb positive, with or
without serum HBV-DNA positivity”. Did the patients undergo liver biopsy to
detect the persistence of HBV DNA in the hepatic tissue? In my opinion, an
HBsAg negative/HBcAb positive patient should be consider as potential occult
carrier.
4. In Discussion the authors reported the reactivation of viral hepatitis in different
clinical conditions, in particular in onco-haematological and transplant setting. A
clear reference showing the risk of reactivation for patients with OBI following
bone marrow transplantation (an high risk category) should be included.
Minor revisions
1. An experienced author’s editor whose first language is English should revise
the text.
2. The dosage of immunosuppressive therapy (in particular, biological drugs)
should be included in Table 2.
3. Patients instead of subjects should be used (abstract, line 18).
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/s12876-014-0214-x (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Lack of evidence of viral reactivation in HBsAg-negative HBcAb-positive
and HCV patients undergoing immunosuppressive therapy for psoriasis.
Version:2Date:21 October 2014
Reviewer: mauro vigan&ograve;
Reviewer's report:
In this article Morisco et al tried to evidence the lack of viral reactivation in
HBsAg-negative/antiHBc-positive patients and in HCVAb-positive patients
undergoing immunosuppressive therapy for psoriasis. The issue of viral
reactivation in patients undergoing immunosuppression is relevant and the
end-points are clear.
Major concerns:
1) The methods used for monitoring patients were not standardized, and
therefore the paper is difficult to interpret or use as guidelines. It is unclear
whether there was a specific protocol for laboratory testing during follow-up or if
this was performed randomly at different time points. It appears more likely that
this was a retrospective study where serological tests were not available for all
patients nor at a defined timing.
2) I suggest to merge data of anti HBc-positive with antiHBc-positive plus anti
HBs-positive patients
3) The different kind of therapies used, given the different immunosuppressive
potential, may have affected the results
4) Which HBV DNA testing was used in the study?
5) Do you have any data on anti-HBs titers during follow up?
6) In the paragraph with the definition of HBV reactivation the sentence for
HBsAg-positive should be deleted as none of the patients were HBsAg-positive
7) It is not clear whether the data are related to all patients that are still on
treatment
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/s12876-014-0205-y (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Risk of uncomplicated peptic ulcer disease in a cohort of new users of low
dose acetylsalicylic acid for secondary prevention of cardiovascular events
Version:2Date:8 September 2014
Reviewer: Anahita Jalilvand
Reviewer's report:
1. Major or minor essential revisions: none
2. Discretionary revisions:
Although this is mentioned in the discussion, the high prevalence of H pylori
infections in patients who are subsequently diagnosed with PUD does present a
confounding factor. It would be interesting to see how many patients on ASA who
develop PUD are subsequently diagnosed with H. pylori. The goal of this study
was to elucidate the risk factors associated with development of uncomplicated
PUD in patients starting ASA treatment, which it did very clearly. However, the
next question primary care practitioners may face would be how to determine
whether a given patient’s risk for developing PUD is outweighed by the risk of
developing cardiovascular events without ASA therapy.
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 have no competing interest in relation to the paper I have reviewed.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0205-y (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Risk of uncomplicated peptic ulcer disease in a cohort of new users of low
dose acetylsalicylic acid for secondary prevention of cardiovascular events
Version:2Date:16 October 2014
Reviewer: P. Marco Fisichella
Reviewer's report:
Well done study. Major strength is the statistical analysis.
Comments:
1) please state a clear hypothesis and primary aims.
2) please define "uncomplicated" PUD
3) please state the real value of the study and the real value to the reader. The
major findings are well known
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 conflict of interest
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0204-z (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Transplantation of human fetal biliary tree stem/progenitor cells into two
patients with advanced liver cirrhosis
Version:1Date:19 August 2014
Reviewer: Conrado M Fernandez Rodriguez
Reviewer's report:
The authors studied the RBCs antioxidant activity in a cohort of 53 patients with
chronic hepatitis C by measuring superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT)
and reduced glutathione (GPx). Baseline and after treatment patients were
compared within group and baseline values were compared with a healthy
control group. Results are of interest, however, I would liake some points to be
addressed.
Major compulsory revision:
1. How was the control group selected?. Were both groups age and gender
matched?
2. What was the SVR rate in the treated patients?
3. SOD, CAT and GPx comparison between responders and non-responders
should be made.
4. ROC curves for outcome should be compared with the RVR rate which has the
best positive predictive value for SVR so far.
Discretionary revisions:
1. Ribavirin induces RBCs oxidative stress, were there any sub-group treated
solely with peginterferon?
2. GPx and CAT activity were not restored to healthy control levels.
Minor essential revision: Sentence 178-181 is repeated
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
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 have no competing interest regarding this manuscript.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0204-z (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Transplantation of human fetal biliary tree stem/progenitor cells into two
patients with advanced liver cirrhosis
Version:1Date:3 September 2014
Reviewer: fusheng F.W. Wang
Reviewer's report:
This is a very interesting clinical trial. The author transfused human fetal biliary
tree stem/progenitor cells to treat advanced liver cirrhosis. The result showed
that the procedure was safe, and both patients got biochemical and clinical
improvement during the short time follow-up studies. Although there were only
two patients in their treatment, but it really provided some important suggestions
for the forthcoming application. One is the whole isolation procedure was carried
out under “European guidelines of GMP for medicinal products for human use”,
which will promote its commercialization. The other one is fetal biliary tree stem
cells are a suitable and large source for cell therapy, which will overcomes
limitations of hepatocyte-based therapy.
Major Compulsory Revisions:
1. We noticed that the highest purity for human fetal biliary tree stem/progenitor
cells was only 73.9%, if the rest of other cells will affect the treatment effeciency
? and how to improve the purity in the future.
Discretionary Revisions:
1.Both patients showed biochemical and clinical improvement during the 6 month
follow-up study, if it indicate that the second treatment should be give at this time
point(6 month)?
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/s12876-014-0206-x (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Toll-like receptor 4 Asp299Gly, Thr399Ile polymorphisms in Moroccan
patients with inflammatory bowel disease
Version:1Date:4 August 2014
Reviewer: Aysegul Kuskucu
Reviewer's report:
Minor Essential Revisions
1- In abstract they gave the study population as 117 patients and 128 healthy
unrelated blood donors but in article they said 114 IBD patients and 112 healthy
unrelated blood donors, so they have to correct the numbers.
2- Researchers have done a meta-analysis, I think they have to cahnge the
article title
Major Compulsory Revisions
1- The manuscript needs to be seen by a statistician
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/s12876-014-0200-3 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Frequency and risk factors for rebleeding events in patients with small
bowel angioectasia
Version:1Date:17 June 2014
Reviewer: Tibor Wittmann
Reviewer's report:
Dear Editor!
The papar of Eiji Sand collaborators has a real clinical interest.
Beside this fact several question remain to clear up.
These are: wheter an overnight fasting was enough for obtaining clear pictures
from the whole small bowel? How the author may explain the bleeding detection
rate, not higher then 42,6%. 22 patient were enrolled in the goup receiving
endoscopis treatment, but 46 patints received not,and why ?In patient with
rebleeding the rate of haematocaesia or melena was high. It requires more data
and explanation. Eg . : how was the correlation between the bleeding location
detected durind the first investigation with CE and during the rebeeding ?
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:
l declare that l have no competing interests' below.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0200-3 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Frequency and risk factors for rebleeding events in patients with small
bowel angioectasia
Version:1Date:25 June 2014
Reviewer: István Rácz
Reviewer's report:
Comments to the authors
It is excellent paper reporting that how difficult is to find and to treat
endoscopically small bowel angiectasias causing permament or intermittent
bleedings. The authors in 68 patients performed balloon enteroscopy and in 22
patients APC treatment of the angiectasias were done. All angiectasias were
previously (within 5 days) detected by CE.
In 46 angiectasia patients proved both by CE and enteroscopy no interventional
treatment was performed. All patients were followed up for one year. There was
no significant difference in the one year rebleeding rates comparing the APC
treatment and the conservative treated groups. The authors conclude that one
single session of endoscopic treatment by APC for small bowel is not sufficient to
prevent future rebleedings.
Although the paper is very informative several questions may arise:
1. The authors in 74 patient detected angiectasias by CE. All these patients
underwent enteroscopy? Could the authors confirm the CE results by
enteroscopy in all patients?
2. Could the authors measure or estimate the size (diameter) of the
angiectasias? If yes, were any tendency of higher rebleeding rates in larger
angiodyplasias when compared with the smaller ones?
3. What kind of thermal energy (Watts) were used for APC shots?
4. How do the authors comment that ongoing anticoagulant treatment was not
predictor for rebleeding?
5. How does the aspirin (even low dose) therapy affected the rebleeding rates?
Aspirin has not the same effect in the small bowel like NSAIDs.
Level of interest: An article of outstanding merit and interest in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, but I do not feel adequately qualified to assess the
statistics.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0200-3 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Frequency and risk factors for rebleeding events in patients with small
bowel angioectasia
Version:2Date:31 August 2014
Reviewer: Tibor Wittmann
Reviewer's report:
I accept the author's response to my review.I propose the publication of the
manuscript( Frequency and risk factors for rebliding ...)
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/s12876-014-0200-3 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Frequency and risk factors for rebleeding events in patients with small
bowel angioectasia
Version:2Date:2 September 2014
Reviewer: István Rácz
Reviewer's report:
It is excellent paper reporting that how difficult is to find and to treat
endoscopically small bowel angiectasias causing permament or intermittent
bleedings. The authors in 68 patients performed balloon enteroscopy and in 22
patients APC treatment of the angiectasias were done. All angiectasias were
previously (within 5 days) detected by CE.
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:
No competing interest.
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0211-0 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Trends in Gastroenteritis-Associated Mortality in the United States,
1985-2005: Variations by ICD-9 and ICD-10 Codes
Version:1Date:19 May 2014
Reviewer: William G. Letson
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory: A statement in methods, detailing why the analysis was cut
off in 2005. Analysis should be included on the impact of ICD-10 categories on
the outcome. Presently the authors simply say it is so but offer no analytic proof.
Minor Essential: None
Discretionary Revisions: None
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
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/s12876-014-0208-8 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Expression of NALPs in adipose and the fibrotic progression of NAFLD in
obese subjects
Version:1Date:11 September 2014
Reviewer: sammy saab
Reviewer's report:
I read with great interest the manuscript by Mehta et al. The paper is very well
written and timely. Fatty liver is the common cause of hepatitis in the United
States. Despite the prevalence and health care utilization implication, our
understanding of the pathogenesis and not really evolved over the past 5-10
years. The work by Mehta et al provide some insight into possible signal
translation of fatty liver.
I just have minor comments.
Which visceral tissue was biopsied and does it matter?
How is inflammation defined? Are there different degrees or
severities?
The paper would benefit from a schematic representation of
the signals/pathways
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:
No to all
Review for 10.1186/s12876-014-0208-8 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Expression of NALPs in adipose and the fibrotic progression of NAFLD in
obese subjects
Version:2Date:28 October 2014
Reviewer: ALEXANDER WREE
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript by Metha et al. has been marginally improved during the review
process. Initially raised questions were not properly addressed by the authors in
the review process and therefore little improvement was achieved to support the
concept of the manuscript.
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/s12876-014-0201-2 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Effect of 5-HT7 receptor blockade on liver regeneration after 60-70% partial
hepatectomy
Version:4Date:27 March 2014
Reviewer: Bruno Christ
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
The authors investigated the impact of the inhibition of 5-HT7-receptor signaling
on liver regeneration after 2/3 hepatectomy. They used 3 different methods to
evaluate regeneration and came to the result that receptor inhibition attenuated
and inhibited maximal regeneration rates. The study is straightforward and
presents clear results. Yet, a few issues need to be addressed before
publication.
1. What is the rational for using two different inhibitors of the 5-HT7-receptor?
Some comment on the specificity of the inhibitors´ action would be helpful. What
about the systemic pharmacological effects of the inhibitors? Is transient
inhibition of liver regeneration due to a short half-life of the drugs?
2. In that context it should be discussed how far side actions of the inhibitors can
be excluded. It has been shown that SB269970 inhibits also the
alpha2-adrenergic receptor. This is of relevance since data of beta-adrenergic
inhibition of liver regeneration are available. How specific is the action esp. of
SB269970 on the 5-HT7-receptor? Is there a dose-response relationship?
3. The mechanism, which is operative in inhibition of regeneration by
5-HT7-receptor blockade, is only speculated upon. It has been shown that
beta-receptor inhibition might have an indirect effect on regeneration inhibition by
attenuation of fatty acid supply from adipose tissue, thus limiting energy supply
for regeneration. Are there any experimental data available showing the direct
involvement of 5-HT7-receptor blockade in the liver? Or vice versa, can the
authors exclude systemic effects of receptor inhibition such as inhibition of
lipolysis in the adipose tissue?
4. The authors show both attenuation and inhibition of liver regeneration by
receptor inhibition. It would be expected that the liver mass is only partially
restored in comparison with controls. Did the authors determine the
liver-to-body-weight ratio, which would important to estimate liver function after
resection under 5-HT7-receptor blockade?
Minor Essential Revisions
Please indicate positive nuclei to be counted by arrows in Figs 4 and 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/s12876-014-0201-2 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Effect of 5-HT7 receptor blockade on liver regeneration after 60-70% partial
hepatectomy
Version:4Date:11 April 2014
Reviewer: Vincenzo La Mura
Reviewer's report:
The manuscript describes an experimental study aimed at determining the effect
of 5-HT7 receptor blockade on liver regeneration after partial hepatectomy. The
design is coherent with the original aim. The results are in accordance with the
hypothesis however, in my opinion, other experiments, if possible, should be
performed in order to reinforce the evidence on the biological role played by this
receptor on liver regeneration.
Major Compulsory Revisions
Are there any pharmacological strategies that can be used in order to show that
the activation of the cascade by an alternative pathway allows to reverse the
biological effect of the antagonist? If so, I suggest to add this kind of experiment
that sensibly reinforce the evidence of the final message.
Minor Essential Revisions
The experiment with the inverse agonist of 5-HT7 receptor (SB-258719) should
be presented in the result paragraph rather than in the discussion.
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/s12876-014-0203-0 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Differences in the genetic pathway(s) between Vietnamese and Japanese
colorectal cancers
Version:2Date:17 July 2014
Reviewer: Rashmi Prasad
Reviewer's report:
The current study compares somatic K-ras, mtDNA and high-frequency
microsatellite instability mutation frequencies between Vietnamese and Japanese
CRC patients.
The strengths of the paper:
1) one of the few studies, possibly one of the first which studies genetic
alterations in the Vietnamese CRCs.
2) there is a significant different between the frequencies of the mutations
studied, suggestive of altered mechanisms for CRC between the two
populations.
Major Compulsory Revisions
1) of course, the sample size. Considering that this is a study based on
differences in frequencies between the two populations, a higher sample size
would provide more power to the data. This paper is based on frequencies of
selected mutations in two different populations. It would be relevant to mention
perhaps the frequencies of these mutations in the Japanese population (if
published), and assess if they match with the frequencies obtained in the present
study.
2) It is not clear why these three mutations were specifically selected, why only
K-ras, mtDNA and high-frequency microsatellite instability? It would be clearer if
the selection criteria was mentioned while framing the questions this paper
addresses in the introduction itself.
3) ONe of the most important aspects - this paper investigates somatic
mutations, however, the conclusions mention "genetic pathways". This would be
wrong, in the sense that these somatic mutations are restricted, quite possibly to
the cancer cells whereas using the term "genetic pathways" is suggestive of the
involvement of the whole genome.
4) The authors also mention GWAS studies - which investigate primarily genetic
susceptibility, whereas this paper is mainly focused on somatic mutations. This
requires a major revision in phrasing and discussion.
5) This paper needs a stronger discussion and a more specific conclusion.
Discretionary Revisions
Would be interesting if outcomes in both populations could be assessed based
on which mutations they carry. However it is understandable if such data were
unavailable.
Minor Essential Revisions
1) The paper refers to Table 1, 2 3 and 4, whereas these are available as
supplementary data.
2) The gel figure A appears are one big continuous band, B as blurred banks and
C as one continuous blurred band. Perhaps a better picture?
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/s12876-014-0203-0 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Differences in the genetic alterations between Vietnamese and Japanese
colorectal cancers
Version:3Date:7 September 2014
Reviewer: Rashmi Prasad
Reviewer's report:
This study highlights the differences in K-ras, mtDNA and high-frequency
microsatellite instability mutation frequencies between Vietnamese and Japanese
CRC patients. Environment, especially diet could have a high impact on age of
onset and could vary in the span of a decade.
While the low number of samples could result in a sampling bias, this issue has
been addressed.
Minor Essential Revisions
A better Figure for B and C is recommended.
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/s12876-014-0203-0 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Differences in the mutations of K-ras and mitochondrial DNA and in
microsatellite instability between Vietnamese and Japanese colorectal cancers
Version:4Date:5 October 2014
Reviewer: Barbara Pardini
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
The authors reply in a sufficient manner to the points raised by the Reviewer.
However, there are still 2 main points to be clarified:
1) Figure 1 is really terrible. I understand that the assay could be tricky and to
obtain a good image may be hard, but as it is (and now it seems that Authors
magnified it making it even worst) the image is really not telling much.
2) I still believe that there was not a proof reading by an English -Native speaker,
since in the text that ere are many repetitions and not clear sentences..The
modified title, for example is not so clear and correct: I would suggest
"Differences in K-ras mutations, mitochondrial DNA, and microsatellite instability
between Vietnamese and Japanese colorectal cancers patients"
For the rest I am satisfied with the replies given by the Authors.
Discretionary Revisions
In the future, I would suggest the Authors to improve the number of samples and
to be more careful in the comparison of different populations trying to avoid
possible bias.
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 10.1186/1471-230X-14-170 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Covered versus uncovered self-expandable metallic stents for palliation of
malignant gastric outlet obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Version:2Date:21 May 2014
Reviewer: Takaya Shimura
Reviewer's report:
This paper is a meta-analysis about the results of covered vs. uncovered SEMS
for GOO.
This review article is well summarized and this information may be useful for
general practice. However, in recent, there is a similar meta-analysis. I thus ask
authors to amend something as shown below.
1. Similar meta-analysis has been recently published (Int J Med Sci. 2013 Apr
27;10(7):825-35). Although this meta-analysis used only prospective study and
RCT, conclusion is the same. Lee’s (2009) and Kim’s (2010) studies were used
in this meta-analysis, which were also used in your meta-analysis, but
meta-analysis using only prospective study is easier and more feasible for
interpretation… I ask you to compare your analysis with this meta-analysis and
discuss about that.
2. Please describe the kind and number of cancer in your using studies.
3. Chemotherapeutic drugs has been recently developed for malignancies with
GOO including gastric cancer. Description about the presence or absence of
chemotherapy after SEMS in each study would provide useful information for the
readers if those data are available.
4. Why don’t you use the retrospective study of Gastrointest Endosc. 2007
May;65(6):782-7? Is this study already duplicate in your analysis?
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 10.1186/1471-230X-14-170 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Covered versus uncovered self-expandable metallic stents for palliation of
malignant gastric outlet obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Version:2Date:23 June 2014
Reviewer: Chen Shuan Chung
Reviewer's report:
This study aimed to elucidate the differences in efficacy and safety between
covered and uncovered self-expandable metallic stents for the management of
malignant gastric outlet obstruction by meta-analysis method. Some questions
should be answered by authors before consideration for publication.
Major Compulsory Revisions
1.In the “Complications and reintervention” part of the “Results”, uncovered stent
was associated with lower rate of stent obstruction (page 8, line 12-13); however,
in the “Sensitivity analysis” part of the “Results”, covered stent was associated
with lower rate of stent obstruction (page 9, line 1-3). Could you make more
explanations about this issue in the “discussion” part, or provide raw data for
statistical analysis?
Minor Essential Revisions:
1.There was no analysis of demographic data in the enrolled population? Were
the etiologies for malignant gastric outlet obstruction the same or heterogeneous
in most of the studies?
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 have no competing interests.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-150 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:Quality of life and health care consultation in 13 to 18 year olds with
abdominal pain predominant functional gastrointestinal diseases
Version:3Date:3 June 2014
Reviewer: Sanjiv Mahadeva
Reviewer's report:
The authors have responded to all of my comments satisfactorily
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 have no competing interests
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-147 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:"Fast track" rehabilitation after gastric cancer resection: experience with 80
consecutive cases
Version:1Date:7 March 2014
Reviewer: Atsuhiko Murata
Reviewer's report:
Authors investigated the safety and efficacy of “Fast truck rehabilitation” for
patients undergoing gastrectomy. They concluded that fast-track multimodal
rehabilitation is feasible and safe in patients undergoing gastric cancer resection
and may reduce time to first flatus and postoperative hospital stays.
I think that this paper is interesting. However, some major revisions are required.
Please consider the following points.
(Major compulsory revisions)
1. I guess that the type of gastrectomies (partial or total gastrectomy) may
influence to start of “Fast truck rehabilitation” for patients with gastric cancer.
Were there any significant difference with regard to time to first flatus or complete
oral intake between types of gastrectomy?
2. Total of 15% of complications (surgical and general complications) occurred in
patients in this study. How did these complications affect the “Fast truck
rehabilitation” ?
(Minor essential revisions)
1. Authors should use the first decimal place to unify the number presented in
Tables.
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 have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-147 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:"Fast track" rehabilitation after gastric cancer resection: experience with 80
consecutive cases
Version:1Date:13 March 2014
Reviewer: Yoshio Haga
Reviewer's report:
The authors showed the results which had already been demonstrated in the
previous literatures. Furthermore, they analyzed relatively small number of
heterogeneous patients and did not show control data. I do not understand why
the authors were not able to obtain data of historical control.
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
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 10.1186/1471-230X-14-147 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:"Fast track" rehabilitation after gastric cancer resection: experience with 80
consecutive cases
Version:1Date:22 March 2014
Reviewer: Alberto Biondi
Reviewer's report:
The paper is generally well written.
1) I think that in this paper continuous data should be reported as a median value
and range because the sample size is quite small.
2) In this paper there is no data mining. The Authors should investigate
association between variables and outcome. Fast track protocols are usually
evaluated as a combination of several pre/intra/postoperative measures but
identify which measures mostly influence results is important as well. In this
regard the Authors report a very short operation time compared with others study
and in my opinion could be and independent factor affecting postoperative
course.
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 10.1186/1471-230X-14-147 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:"Fast track" rehabilitation after gastric cancer resection: experience with 80
consecutive cases
Version:2Date:31 May 2014
Reviewer: Alberto Biondi
Reviewer's report:
I think that the article is acceptable in its present form
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 interest
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-147 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:"Fast track" rehabilitation after gastric cancer resection: experience with 80
consecutive cases
Version:2Date:7 June 2014
Reviewer: Atsuhiko Murata
Reviewer's report:
Authors clearly responded to my comments. I think that there are no further
correction in this manuscript.
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 conflicts of interest to declare.
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-14-147 (2014)

Reviewer's report
Title:"Fast track" rehabilitation after gastric cancer resection: experience with 80
consecutive cases
Version:2Date:18 June 2014
Reviewer: Yoshio Haga
Reviewer's report:
1. Major Compulsory Revisions
The authors seem to demonstrate the effects of FTS on postoperative outcome,
such as early recovery and short hospital stay by comparing the data with those
of the previous studies with conventional perioperative care. Since the
postoperative outcome is affected by both surgical technique and postoperative
care, the effects of FTS on postoperative outcome should be evaluated under the
same surgical technique. In this context, it is impossible to determine the effects
of FTS on postoperative outcome by comparing the data with previous studies.
This study only demonstrated the feasibility of FTS for open gastrectomy in a
well-trained surgeon.
2. Minor Essential Revisions
Heterogeneous population of surgical procedures in this study also made it
difficult to evaluate the effects of FTS.
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
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 10.1186/1471-230X-13-176 (2013)

Reviewer's report
Title:Safety and effectiveness using dexmedetomidine sedation versus propofol
TCI/alfentanil sedation during oesophagus interventions (SEDEX): A randomized
trial
Version: 1Date:12 July 2013
Reviewer: Reino Pöyhiä
Reviewer's report:
Major revisions: More information is needed about the following issues: a)The
dosing of dexmedetomidine should be clarified in a detailed way. b) What is the
time perspective the desired sedation level would be gained using - i.e. how
many minutes before the procedure the administration of dexmedetomidine will
be initiated?
Minor issues: The authors should add the study by Dr Mazanikov et al. Surg
Endosc. 2013 Jun;27(6):2163-8 in the reference list and consider their protocol in
the light of the results of that study.
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-13-176 (2013)

Reviewer's report
Title:Safety and effectiveness using dexmedetomidine sedation versus propofol
TCI/alfentanil sedation during oesophagus interventions (SEDEX): A randomized
trial
Version: 1Date:18 July 2013
Reviewer: kenan kaygusuz
Reviewer's report:
Minor revision
1. In the methods section(intervention) The details of TCI should be explained
clearly (dose?, time?).
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-13-176 (2013)

Reviewer's report
Title:Safety and effectiveness using dexmedetomidine sedation versus propofol
TCI/alfentanil sedation during oesophagus interventions (SEDEX): A randomized
trial
Version: 1Date:29 July 2013
Reviewer: aliye esmaoglu
Reviewer's report:
Subject is not original so far, many studies on this issue was already -Material
and Methods incorrect fentanyl applied only to a group -Discussion inadequate
Review for 10.1186/1471-230X-13-174 (2013)

Reviewer's report
Title:Endocytoscopic findings of lymphomas of the stomach
Version: 2Date:28 December 2012
Reviewer: Emanuele Meroni
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript summarizes results of an interesting case series which suggests
that endocytoscopy have a possible impact on clinical management of
lymphomas involving the stomach.
The following revisions are suggested :
1) Major compulsory revision
In Methods section, Authors should explain how they overcame technical
difficulty in targeting biopsies following endocytoscopic observation. In fact, if
compared to a through-the-scope endocytoscopy (ECS) probe, an integrated
prototype raises the issue of assessing a pinpoint correlation between the area of
mucosa observed and the area samples for histology, providing the confirm of
endocytoscopic findings. Operative channel of the integrated endocytoscope is
parallel to the ECS system, thus making it more difficult to target biopsies of the
mucosa explored. The task is much easier when using the probe, since biopsy
forceps is introduced through the channel immediately after removing the ECS
probe.
2) Minor essential revision
in Methods section, it would be advisable to state whether the study is
prospective or retrospective. Besides this, is it a series of consecutive patients ?
How were they recruited ?
3) Minor essential revisions
Word corrections needed :
Page 2, line 11 : MALT lymphoma cases
Page 4, line 18 : …may vary among mass-forming….
Page 7, line 11 : …histopathological…
Page 8, line 1 : …underwent repeated endocytoscopy…
Page 8, line 22 : . …histopathological…
Page 8, line 23 : …lamina propria…
Page 11, line 5 : …there were crowded cellular elements….
Page 12, line 8 : .. repeated endocytoscopic….
Page 12, line 18 : It has been reported….
Page 13, line 3 :…responsiveness for anti-tumor therapies…
Page 13, line 12 & 13 : Endocytoscopy virtually enables histopathological
differential diagnosis for lymphoproliferative disorders and their clinical
assessment….
Page 13, line 19 : …..CR, complete remission….
Page 13, line 23 : No disclosures
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 10.1186/1471-230X-13-174 (2013)

Reviewer's report
Title:Endocytoscopic findings of lymphomas of the stomach
Version: 2Date:8 September 2013
Reviewer: Biljana S Mihaljevic
Reviewer's report:
Please improve language
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 10.1186/1471-230X-13-175 (2013)

Reviewer's report
Title:Abnormal Fecal Microbiota Community and Functions in Patients with
Hepatitis B Liver Cirrhosis as Revealed by a Metagenomic Approach
Version: 1Date:14 October 2013
Reviewer: Matthias Zilbauer
Reviewer's report:
In their study Wei and colleagues have examined composition of gut microbiota
in healthy controls and patients with Hepatitis B liver cirrhosis (HBLC).
Specifically, they have extracted bacterial DNA from stool samples and used next
generation sequencing to assess composition and partly function of gut bacteria.
Their results demonstrate clear differences in the composition and function of gut
microbiota between controls and HBLC patients.
Overall the manuscript is well written, data presented in a concise way and
methodologies as well as statistical analysis seem sound.
Major criticism
1) Lack of novelty, i.e. what is new compared to the data published by Chen et al
in 2011 (Hepatology. 2011 Aug;54(2): Characterization of fecal microbial
communities in patients with liver cirrhosis)
2) What is the relevance to disease - e.g. chronic hepatitis B infection? How can
this data be used to improve treatment/management, use as biomarker?
3) One of the main and most important questions that remain is what is cause
and consequence? Most likely, changes in gut microbiota are the consequence
of cirrhosis; what would be interesting to know is in what way changes in the gut
microbiota influence disease progression.
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 10.1186/1471-230X-13-175 (2013)

Reviewer's report
Title:Abnormal Fecal Microbiota Community and Functions in Patients with
Hepatitis B Liver Cirrhosis as Revealed by a Metagenomic Approach
Version:1Date:23 October 2013
Reviewer: Isabella Inden
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revsisions:
1. How many HBV-DNA copies have the patients in the different CTP-grading
groups? Is there a correlation between viral load and microbiota
community/functions?
2. Is there a difference in microbiota community and functions between
HBV-treated patients/non-treated patients and resolver?
3. Is the control cohort also Anti-HBc negativ or only HBV-DNA negative?
Minor Essential revisions:
1. Some spelling mistakes, for exampel "negtive" in Table 1, or "possessd" in
DISCUSSION.
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 10.1186/1471-230X-13-175 (2013)

Reviewer's report
Title:Abnormal fecal microbiota community and functions in patients with
hepatitis B liver cirrhosis as revealed by a metagenomic approach
Version:4Date:18 November 2013
Reviewer: Matthias Zilbauer
Reviewer's report:
All of my previous points have been addressed.
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