Title: Comparison of the operative outcomes and learning curves between laparoscopic and
“Micro Hand S” robot-assisted total mesorectal excision  for rectal cancer: A retrospective study
Version: 1 Date: 14 Apr 2021
Reviewer:  Audrius Dulskas
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
I want to congratulate you with this nice study. Still I have some comments and questions.
INTRODUCTION
-Da Vinci robot (Company name, City, Country)
METHODS
-How many patients were treated at your center during the study period
-what were the inclusion/exclusion criteria? - CONSORT flow chart should be added.
-More patients with ASA I were in R group compared to more patients with ASA III
-Why have you assessed only male urogenital function and none for female patients?
-Fig S1 - same structures with different names (IMA and IMV).
-Used questionnaires should be cited. Are they validated for the use in Chinese population?
RESULTS
-Why is the length of hospital stay so long? (9vs 12 days). In western countries it usually is 3-5
days. Is it because of the reimbursement programs?
-Risk of complications is also relatively high.
-What was the length of robotic docking time?
-What was the reason of conversion? What are the possible reasons of local recurrences? Who
did you define the local recurrence?
DISCUSSION
-First sentence - what do you mean by peripheral l/n?
-The discussion should start with you results.
-How can ileostomy decrease the anastomotic line bleeding?
-The prevention of anastomotic leak with ileostomy is also questionable and still discussed.
-On the whole - English should be improved. Avoid spoken English usage (What's, etc)
-safety and feasibility should be defined in the methods
The crucial limitations are small sample size
Title: Comparison of the operative outcomes and learning curves between laparoscopic and
“Micro Hand S” robot-assisted total mesorectal excision  for rectal cancer: A retrospective study
Version: 1 Date: 14 Apr 2021
Reviewer:  Audrius Dulskas
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
I want to congratulate you with this nice study. Still I have some comments and questions.
INTRODUCTION
-Da Vinci robot (Company name, City, Country)
METHODS
-How many patients were treated at your center during the study period
-what were the inclusion/exclusion criteria? - CONSORT flow chart should be added.
-More patients with ASA I were in R group compared to more patients with ASA III
-Why have you assessed only male urogenital function and none for female patients?
-Fig S1 - same structures with different names (IMA and IMV).
-Used questionnaires should be cited. Are they validated for the use in Chinese population?
RESULTS
-Why is the length of hospital stay so long? (9vs 12 days). In western countries it usually is 3-5
days. Is it because of the reimbursement programs?
-Risk of complications is also relatively high.
-What was the length of robotic docking time?
-What was the reason of conversion? What are the possible reasons of local recurrences? Who
did you define the local recurrence?
DISCUSSION
-First sentence - what do you mean by peripheral l/n?
-The discussion should start with you results.
-How can ileostomy decrease the anastomotic line bleeding?
-The prevention of anastomotic leak with ileostomy is also questionable and still discussed.
-On the whole - English should be improved. Avoid spoken English usage (What's, etc)
-safety and feasibility should be defined in the methods
The crucial limitations are small sample size
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Comparison of the operative outcomes and learning curves between laparoscopic and
“Micro Hand S” robot-assisted total mesorectal excision  for rectal cancer: A retrospective study
Version: 1 Date: 14 Apr 2021
Reviewer:  Audrius Dulskas
Reviewer's report:
Dear Authors,
I want to congratulate you with this nice study. Still I have some comments and questions.
INTRODUCTION
-Da Vinci robot (Company name, City, Country)
METHODS
-How many patients were treated at your center during the study period
-what were the inclusion/exclusion criteria? - CONSORT flow chart should be added.
-More patients with ASA I were in R group compared to more patients with ASA III
-Why have you assessed only male urogenital function and none for female patients?
-Fig S1 - same structures with different names (IMA and IMV).
-Used questionnaires should be cited. Are they validated for the use in Chinese population?
RESULTS
-Why is the length of hospital stay so long? (9vs 12 days). In western countries it usually is 3-5
days. Is it because of the reimbursement programs?
-Risk of complications is also relatively high.
-What was the length of robotic docking time?
-What was the reason of conversion? What are the possible reasons of local recurrences? Who
did you define the local recurrence?
DISCUSSION
-First sentence - what do you mean by peripheral l/n?
-The discussion should start with you results.
-How can ileostomy decrease the anastomotic line bleeding?
-The prevention of anastomotic leak with ileostomy is also questionable and still discussed.
-On the whole - English should be improved. Avoid spoken English usage (What's, etc)
-safety and feasibility should be defined in the methods
The crucial limitations are small sample size
assistant