Reviewer's report 
 Grey scale enhancement by a new self-made contrast agent in early cirrhotic stage of rabbit liver Title: 
 2  17 January 2007 Version: Date: 
 Christoph F Dietrich Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
The authors did not mention the explanation of the contrast media in the 
manuscript. 
Methods 
1. done 
2. The authors should mention why there was no time intensity curve measurement of HA-HVTT, only for PIT. They discuss a difference of only 2 seconds of arrival time in HA and PV in the discussion section. ----- The 
delayed time of fist bubble appeared in hepatic artery, portal vein and 
hepatic vein was defined as the arrival time of corresponding vessels. HA-HVTT was defined as the time interval from the arrival time of HA to the arrival time of HV. And we use cine-loop function of ViVid 7 to calculate 
the time instead of time-acoustic intensity curve. While PIT is measured 
through time-acoustic intensity curve as a reason of the peak signal 
intensity have to be indicated in the curve. This is mentioned in the methods section. è In our opinion this is no satisfying answer. 
3. Statistical values should be given in the following manner: Mean 
value + - Standard deviaton [Minimum –Maximum] ------ All data in the present paper are given in the manner of mean ? SD. è The authors should give the data including the minimum – maximum values. 
4. Acceptable 
5. Acceptable 6. Acceptable 7. Acceptable 
8. In the introduction section they mention the potential of ultrasound 
contrast agents to produce Doppler shifts. Did they use a Doppler technique? In this case the MI of 0.24 is questionable. Did they use a low MI harmonic technique (commercially available in Vivid 7?). The authors should discuss 
the technique used more precisely. -------In our study, we used low MI 
harmonic technique in the whole study but not Doppler technique. ViVid 7 does not support the Doppler techniques under contrast condition. MI is set at 0.24 in ViVid 7. MI of 0.24 is an experimental value è The authors should 
mention this in the text not only in the comments. 
9. The authors should add the information how long the contrast agent 
was detectable. ------Grey scale enhancement could last more than 50 min 
from both visual assessment and quantitative statistical analysis. But in 
our study, we only detected about 5 minitues after administration only to 
get the peak signal intensity from tome-acoustic intensity Curve. è The authors should mention this in the text not only in the comment 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
Reviewer's report 
 Grey scale enhancement by a new self-made contrast agent in early cirrhotic stage of rabbit liver Title: 
 2  17 January 2007 Version: Date: 
 Christoph F Dietrich Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
The authors did not mention the explanation of the contrast media in the 
manuscript. 
Methods 
1. done 
2. The authors should mention why there was no time intensity curve measurement of HA-HVTT, only for PIT. They discuss a difference of only 2 seconds of arrival time in HA and PV in the discussion section. ----- The 
delayed time of fist bubble appeared in hepatic artery, portal vein and 
hepatic vein was defined as the arrival time of corresponding vessels. HA-HVTT was defined as the time interval from the arrival time of HA to the arrival time of HV. And we use cine-loop function of ViVid 7 to calculate 
the time instead of time-acoustic intensity curve. While PIT is measured 
through time-acoustic intensity curve as a reason of the peak signal 
intensity have to be indicated in the curve. This is mentioned in the methods section. è In our opinion this is no satisfying answer. 
3. Statistical values should be given in the following manner: Mean 
value + - Standard deviaton [Minimum –Maximum] ------ All data in the present paper are given in the manner of mean ? SD. è The authors should give the data including the minimum – maximum values. 
4. Acceptable 
5. Acceptable 6. Acceptable 7. Acceptable 
8. In the introduction section they mention the potential of ultrasound 
contrast agents to produce Doppler shifts. Did they use a Doppler technique? In this case the MI of 0.24 is questionable. Did they use a low MI harmonic technique (commercially available in Vivid 7?). The authors should discuss 
the technique used more precisely. -------In our study, we used low MI 
harmonic technique in the whole study but not Doppler technique. ViVid 7 does not support the Doppler techniques under contrast condition. MI is set at 0.24 in ViVid 7. MI of 0.24 is an experimental value è The authors should 
mention this in the text not only in the comments. 
9. The authors should add the information how long the contrast agent 
was detectable. ------Grey scale enhancement could last more than 50 min 
from both visual assessment and quantitative statistical analysis. But in 
our study, we only detected about 5 minitues after administration only to 
get the peak signal intensity from tome-acoustic intensity Curve. è The authors should mention this in the text not only in the comment 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report 
 Grey scale enhancement by a new self-made contrast agent in early cirrhotic stage of rabbit liver Title: 
 2  17 January 2007 Version: Date: 
 Christoph F Dietrich Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
The authors did not mention the explanation of the contrast media in the 
manuscript. 
Methods 
1. done 
2. The authors should mention why there was no time intensity curve measurement of HA-HVTT, only for PIT. They discuss a difference of only 2 seconds of arrival time in HA and PV in the discussion section. ----- The 
delayed time of fist bubble appeared in hepatic artery, portal vein and 
hepatic vein was defined as the arrival time of corresponding vessels. HA-HVTT was defined as the time interval from the arrival time of HA to the arrival time of HV. And we use cine-loop function of ViVid 7 to calculate 
the time instead of time-acoustic intensity curve. While PIT is measured 
through time-acoustic intensity curve as a reason of the peak signal 
intensity have to be indicated in the curve. This is mentioned in the methods section. è In our opinion this is no satisfying answer. 
3. Statistical values should be given in the following manner: Mean 
value + - Standard deviaton [Minimum –Maximum] ------ All data in the present paper are given in the manner of mean ? SD. è The authors should give the data including the minimum – maximum values. 
4. Acceptable 
5. Acceptable 6. Acceptable 7. Acceptable 
8. In the introduction section they mention the potential of ultrasound 
contrast agents to produce Doppler shifts. Did they use a Doppler technique? In this case the MI of 0.24 is questionable. Did they use a low MI harmonic technique (commercially available in Vivid 7?). The authors should discuss 
the technique used more precisely. -------In our study, we used low MI 
harmonic technique in the whole study but not Doppler technique. ViVid 7 does not support the Doppler techniques under contrast condition. MI is set at 0.24 in ViVid 7. MI of 0.24 is an experimental value è The authors should 
mention this in the text not only in the comments. 
9. The authors should add the information how long the contrast agent 
was detectable. ------Grey scale enhancement could last more than 50 min 
from both visual assessment and quantitative statistical analysis. But in 
our study, we only detected about 5 minitues after administration only to 
get the peak signal intensity from tome-acoustic intensity Curve. è The authors should mention this in the text not only in the comment 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
assistant