Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Is lymph node dissection mandatory among early stage endometrial cancer
patients? A retrospective study
Version: 
0 
Date: 
02 Aug 2020
Reviewer's report:
I have read this manuscript, although a retrospective study, i strongly
recommend it for publication. However, the authors should respond to the
queries and comments below: 
#Abstract line 23,the authors should tell us the type of diagnosis (tissue or
pathological diagnosis)
# line 30, the authors reported that Six patients (16.6%) underwent laparotomy
and 20 patients (55.6%) underwent laparoscopic surgery what happened to the
remaining ten patients?
#line 34,35 According to the policy of each institution, 18 patients (22.2%)
received adjuvant 
therapy, and half of them also received chemotherapy (4
patients; 50%). 18 out of 36 cannot be 22.2%. Again, half of 18 cannot also be
4(50%). The authors should rephrase this sentence to bring out the true meaning
#line 110; SUV and ADC should be written in full.
#lines 113-115: Six patients (16.6%) underwent laparotomy and 20 patients
(55.6%) underwent laparoscopic surgery. What about those that had robotic
surgery? it may be simpler to just describe the patients based on the type of
surgery they had rather than the technique or the approach used.
# line 133, the statement should read " none of the patients who met the criteria
had lymph node metastasis confirmed by pathology.
#Line 145, i think this should rather be not greater than 2cm instead.
# the limitations mentioned are fine but I also feel that the fact that almost all the
patients had endometroid type on histology is a limitation because we are aware
that various histological types behave differently at the same stage. Example
papillary tumor types may be more aggressive
Publons Reviewer Recognition
. Springer Nature can send verification of this
review directly to Publons (a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would
like to take advantage of this service, please click on the “Yes” option below.
Your name, email address, title of the reviewed manuscript, name of the journal,
and date of your review submission (the “Review Data”) will then be transmitted
to Publons upon publication of the manuscript. If you have already registered at
Publons, they will notify you of the receipt of this review and update your profile
as per your settings and their policy. If you are not registered with Publons, you
will receive an email from them asking you to register in order for them to be
able to recognize your review on your new profile page. Publons may use the
Review Data to generate derivative metadata for the benefit of Publons and you
as a reviewer, carefully considering the sensitivity of such information. For
example, Publons may verify your record as a reviewer by updating your profile
published on its webservice if you have registered for such service or help
editors to identify candidate reviewers. Please find the details of processing in
Publons’ privacy policy 
https://publons.com/about/terms
Yes
Declaration of competing interests
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following
questions:
1
. 
Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or
salary from an organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially
from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?
2
. 
Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way
gain or lose financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now
or in the future?
3
. 
Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the
content of the manuscript?
4
. 
Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an
organization that holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of
the manuscript?
5
. 
Do you have any other financial competing interests?
6
. 
Do you have any non-financial competing interests in relation to this
paper?
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing
interests' below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.
I declare i have no competing interests
Reviewer Publication Consent.
 I agree for my report to be made available
under an Open Access Creative Commons CC-BY License (
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
) if this manuscript is accepted for
publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the published
report have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not
be published.
If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the editorial
office before completing the review.
If you wish, you can include your name in your published report. Please note
you must decide whether to include your name at the start of the process and
confirm this decision whenever prompted. If you change your decision later, we
will not be able to publish your name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please 
do not
 publish my name
with my report. (default)
Is the study design appropriate to answer the research question (including the use
of appropriate controls), and are the conclusions supported by the evidence
presented?
Yes
Are the methods sufficiently described to allow the study to be repeated?
Yes
Is the use of statistics and treatment of uncertainties appropriate?
No
Is the presentation of the work clear?
Yes
Are the images in this manuscript (including electrophoretic gels and blots) free
from apparent manipulation?
Yes