Reviewer's report
Title:Spontaneous good outcome of severe diarrhoea and pseudotumoral
abdominal mass related to mesocolic panniculitis: Case report
Version: 1Date:19 January 2012
Reviewer: Efsevia Vakiani
Reviewer's report:
This report describes a case of mesocolic panniculitis that improved without
immunosuppressive therapy. In general the report is well written (flow and
concepts discussed are good, though some mistakes in language use need to be
corrected).
Major compulsory revisions
1. The authors talk about the importance of histological examination in
establishing the diagnosis, but do not provide any histology images. The case
report would be significantly strengthened by addition of images from the biopsy
of the mesocolic mass and also the mucosal biopsies showing ischemic colitis.
2. At the end of page 7 the authors briefly bring up IgG4-related retroperitoneal
fibrosis. The way it is discussed is a little confusing - admittedly the published
literature to date has contributed to that confusion. Although it is true that some
authors have grouped mesenteric panniculits and IgG4-related firbosis in one
catergory, it is becoming apparent that they are distinct in their pathogenesis. My
recommendation would be for the authors to discuss IgG4-related retroperitoneal
fibrosis as a distinct entity that is part of the differential diagnosis.
3. Table 1. The term lymphosarcoma is old and should not be used. The authors
should also list carcinomatosis (which is mentioned in the text) as well as
IgG4-related retroperitoneal fibrosis. "Infections" diseases should also be
corrected to "infectious diseases".
Minor revisions
There are some spelling mistakes and incorrect word uses that should be
corrected. Below are some examples
1. Page 3 "requires the achievement of a histological analysis confirmation"
sounds awkward. Please re-write.
2. Page 4 "a celioscopy was decided" also sounds awkward. "... a celioscopy
was performed" sounds better.
3. Pag4 Diverticules should be diverticula.
4. Page 6 "until 92%" should be "up to 92%".
5. Page 6 "meso diseases" - please rephrase. Maybe diseases affecting the
mesocolon.
6. Page 6 desmoid tumor, not desmoids tumor. Also the dots need to be
removed.
7. Page 7 "vascularitis" should be vasculitis.
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.
Reviewer's report
Title:Spontaneous good outcome of severe diarrhoea and pseudotumoral
abdominal mass related to mesocolic panniculitis: Case report
Version: 1Date:19 January 2012
Reviewer: Efsevia Vakiani
Reviewer's report:
This report describes a case of mesocolic panniculitis that improved without
immunosuppressive therapy. In general the report is well written (flow and
concepts discussed are good, though some mistakes in language use need to be
corrected).
Major compulsory revisions
1. The authors talk about the importance of histological examination in
establishing the diagnosis, but do not provide any histology images. The case
report would be significantly strengthened by addition of images from the biopsy
of the mesocolic mass and also the mucosal biopsies showing ischemic colitis.
2. At the end of page 7 the authors briefly bring up IgG4-related retroperitoneal
fibrosis. The way it is discussed is a little confusing - admittedly the published
literature to date has contributed to that confusion. Although it is true that some
authors have grouped mesenteric panniculits and IgG4-related firbosis in one
catergory, it is becoming apparent that they are distinct in their pathogenesis. My
recommendation would be for the authors to discuss IgG4-related retroperitoneal
fibrosis as a distinct entity that is part of the differential diagnosis.
3. Table 1. The term lymphosarcoma is old and should not be used. The authors
should also list carcinomatosis (which is mentioned in the text) as well as
IgG4-related retroperitoneal fibrosis. "Infections" diseases should also be
corrected to "infectious diseases".
Minor revisions
There are some spelling mistakes and incorrect word uses that should be
corrected. Below are some examples
1. Page 3 "requires the achievement of a histological analysis confirmation"
sounds awkward. Please re-write.
2. Page 4 "a celioscopy was decided" also sounds awkward. "... a celioscopy
was performed" sounds better.
3. Pag4 Diverticules should be diverticula.
4. Page 6 "until 92%" should be "up to 92%".
5. Page 6 "meso diseases" - please rephrase. Maybe diseases affecting the
mesocolon.
6. Page 6 desmoid tumor, not desmoids tumor. Also the dots need to be
removed.
7. Page 7 "vascularitis" should be vasculitis.
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.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Spontaneous good outcome of severe diarrhoea and pseudotumoral
abdominal mass related to mesocolic panniculitis: Case report
Version: 1Date:19 January 2012
Reviewer: Efsevia Vakiani
Reviewer's report:
This report describes a case of mesocolic panniculitis that improved without
immunosuppressive therapy. In general the report is well written (flow and
concepts discussed are good, though some mistakes in language use need to be
corrected).
Major compulsory revisions
1. The authors talk about the importance of histological examination in
establishing the diagnosis, but do not provide any histology images. The case
report would be significantly strengthened by addition of images from the biopsy
of the mesocolic mass and also the mucosal biopsies showing ischemic colitis.
2. At the end of page 7 the authors briefly bring up IgG4-related retroperitoneal
fibrosis. The way it is discussed is a little confusing - admittedly the published
literature to date has contributed to that confusion. Although it is true that some
authors have grouped mesenteric panniculits and IgG4-related firbosis in one
catergory, it is becoming apparent that they are distinct in their pathogenesis. My
recommendation would be for the authors to discuss IgG4-related retroperitoneal
fibrosis as a distinct entity that is part of the differential diagnosis.
3. Table 1. The term lymphosarcoma is old and should not be used. The authors
should also list carcinomatosis (which is mentioned in the text) as well as
IgG4-related retroperitoneal fibrosis. "Infections" diseases should also be
corrected to "infectious diseases".
Minor revisions
There are some spelling mistakes and incorrect word uses that should be
corrected. Below are some examples
1. Page 3 "requires the achievement of a histological analysis confirmation"
sounds awkward. Please re-write.
2. Page 4 "a celioscopy was decided" also sounds awkward. "... a celioscopy
was performed" sounds better.
3. Pag4 Diverticules should be diverticula.
4. Page 6 "until 92%" should be "up to 92%".
5. Page 6 "meso diseases" - please rephrase. Maybe diseases affecting the
mesocolon.
6. Page 6 desmoid tumor, not desmoids tumor. Also the dots need to be
removed.
7. Page 7 "vascularitis" should be vasculitis.
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.
assistant