Title: CT assessment of total abdominal muscle area index (TAMAI) as a predictive tool for
early post operative complications in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: A prospective case-
control study
Version: 7 Date: 27 Jun 2025
Reviewer:  Dimitrios Kehagias
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for submitting the revised version and addressing most comments. The manuscript
has been significantly refined but I have some more minor comments that you need to address.
Below are my suggestions:
1. In the abstract, results section. "The study enrolled 30 patients who underwent MBS". Here
instead of MBS, replace it with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).
2. Make sure the abbreviations are mentioned once only at the beginning and then used
throughout the text. For instance, BMI is not provided, or LSG is repeatedly mentioned with
the full name.
3. In the introduction try to expand a bit more, by enriching the background. Mentioning exactly
the preoperative predictive factors for postoperative complications in MBS and citing some
recent systematic reviews or landmark studies could improve this.
4. In the methods, section II, change title to “Demographics, anthropometric data and surgical
technique”
Add in this section a paragraph describing the details of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy
(distance from pylorus, bougie size used) and also mention whether all these procedures were
performed by one surgeon and what experience did the surgeon or surgeons have.
Since you investigate complications, these factors are important to be adjusted.
5. Section III "CT acquisition". Clarify that the CT was performed only pre-operatively
(baseline) and not postoperative to evaluate changes in visceral fat. The aim was to show the
prognostic value of preoperative CT for complications. This has to be clear to the reader.
6. Results, section I. "Comparison of age, gender, BMI, weight, and height between the two
arms showed no statistical significance with p values >0.05 ."
These parameters should be added in the table 1 as well, so that you can show the comparisons.
Mentioning just that there were comparable is not enough. Cite also table 1 in the text.
7. Figures and tables are not cited in the text. None of them.
8. In the discussion remove the subtitles. Discussion is one text, not including any subtitles.
Ideally, the findings of your study should mentioned and summarized in the first paragraph.
However, the current form is proper for me.
I believe that after these changes the manuscript will be ready to be published. Carefully revise
the manuscript and address these points that will significantly improve your paper.
Title: CT assessment of total abdominal muscle area index (TAMAI) as a predictive tool for
early post operative complications in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: A prospective case-
control study
Version: 7 Date: 27 Jun 2025
Reviewer:  Dimitrios Kehagias
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for submitting the revised version and addressing most comments. The manuscript
has been significantly refined but I have some more minor comments that you need to address.
Below are my suggestions:
1. In the abstract, results section. "The study enrolled 30 patients who underwent MBS". Here
instead of MBS, replace it with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).
2. Make sure the abbreviations are mentioned once only at the beginning and then used
throughout the text. For instance, BMI is not provided, or LSG is repeatedly mentioned with
the full name.
3. In the introduction try to expand a bit more, by enriching the background. Mentioning exactly
the preoperative predictive factors for postoperative complications in MBS and citing some
recent systematic reviews or landmark studies could improve this.
4. In the methods, section II, change title to “Demographics, anthropometric data and surgical
technique”
Add in this section a paragraph describing the details of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy
(distance from pylorus, bougie size used) and also mention whether all these procedures were
performed by one surgeon and what experience did the surgeon or surgeons have.
Since you investigate complications, these factors are important to be adjusted.
5. Section III "CT acquisition". Clarify that the CT was performed only pre-operatively
(baseline) and not postoperative to evaluate changes in visceral fat. The aim was to show the
prognostic value of preoperative CT for complications. This has to be clear to the reader.
6. Results, section I. "Comparison of age, gender, BMI, weight, and height between the two
arms showed no statistical significance with p values >0.05 ."
These parameters should be added in the table 1 as well, so that you can show the comparisons.
Mentioning just that there were comparable is not enough. Cite also table 1 in the text.
7. Figures and tables are not cited in the text. None of them.
8. In the discussion remove the subtitles. Discussion is one text, not including any subtitles.
Ideally, the findings of your study should mentioned and summarized in the first paragraph.
However, the current form is proper for me.
I believe that after these changes the manuscript will be ready to be published. Carefully revise
the manuscript and address these points that will significantly improve your paper.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: CT assessment of total abdominal muscle area index (TAMAI) as a predictive tool for
early post operative complications in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: A prospective case-
control study
Version: 7 Date: 27 Jun 2025
Reviewer:  Dimitrios Kehagias
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for submitting the revised version and addressing most comments. The manuscript
has been significantly refined but I have some more minor comments that you need to address.
Below are my suggestions:
1. In the abstract, results section. "The study enrolled 30 patients who underwent MBS". Here
instead of MBS, replace it with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).
2. Make sure the abbreviations are mentioned once only at the beginning and then used
throughout the text. For instance, BMI is not provided, or LSG is repeatedly mentioned with
the full name.
3. In the introduction try to expand a bit more, by enriching the background. Mentioning exactly
the preoperative predictive factors for postoperative complications in MBS and citing some
recent systematic reviews or landmark studies could improve this.
4. In the methods, section II, change title to “Demographics, anthropometric data and surgical
technique”
Add in this section a paragraph describing the details of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy
(distance from pylorus, bougie size used) and also mention whether all these procedures were
performed by one surgeon and what experience did the surgeon or surgeons have.
Since you investigate complications, these factors are important to be adjusted.
5. Section III "CT acquisition". Clarify that the CT was performed only pre-operatively
(baseline) and not postoperative to evaluate changes in visceral fat. The aim was to show the
prognostic value of preoperative CT for complications. This has to be clear to the reader.
6. Results, section I. "Comparison of age, gender, BMI, weight, and height between the two
arms showed no statistical significance with p values >0.05 ."
These parameters should be added in the table 1 as well, so that you can show the comparisons.
Mentioning just that there were comparable is not enough. Cite also table 1 in the text.
7. Figures and tables are not cited in the text. None of them.
8. In the discussion remove the subtitles. Discussion is one text, not including any subtitles.
Ideally, the findings of your study should mentioned and summarized in the first paragraph.
However, the current form is proper for me.
I believe that after these changes the manuscript will be ready to be published. Carefully revise
the manuscript and address these points that will significantly improve your paper.
assistant