Reviewer's report
Title:Rectal Biopsies Procedure in Cystic Fibrosis: Technical Aspects and
Patients Perspective for Clinical Trials Feasibility
Version: 1Date:20 November 2012
Reviewer: Martin Hug
Reviewer's report:
The paper by Maria Servidoni and coworkers compares several different
procedures to obtain rectal biopsies with respect to tissue integrity and tolerability
of the entire procedure for the patients. The study accumulates a significant
number of data and is to my best knowledge one of the first publications
including PROs with respect to the diagnosis of Cystic Fibrosis.
Major points:
The authors conclude that the apparently bigger forceps (Jumbo-forceps) yield
better results than the standard forceps as demonstrated by a higher
transepithelial resistance and appearance of the tissue. Keeping in mind that a
significant fraction of investigators using transepithelial measurements across
colonic mucosae it would be worthwhile comparing these data with those
obtained with suction biopsies. The latter are even less invasive than forceps but
very little is reported on transepithelial resistance of tissue samples obtained
through suction. The authors should compare their data with the literature
published by the Rotterdam group that pioneered the technique in the beginning
of the 90s.
The authors also report that bowel preparation with isotonic saline gives better
results than using either glycerol or mannitol. The latter two (or osmotically active
salt solutions in general) are presumably working osmotically and are rather
more frequently used as laxatives prior to abdominal surgery than saline. Could
the authors speculate why glycerol and/or mannitol respectively have a negative
effect on the tissue quality?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
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:Rectal Biopsies Procedure in Cystic Fibrosis: Technical Aspects and
Patients Perspective for Clinical Trials Feasibility
Version: 1Date:20 November 2012
Reviewer: Martin Hug
Reviewer's report:
The paper by Maria Servidoni and coworkers compares several different
procedures to obtain rectal biopsies with respect to tissue integrity and tolerability
of the entire procedure for the patients. The study accumulates a significant
number of data and is to my best knowledge one of the first publications
including PROs with respect to the diagnosis of Cystic Fibrosis.
Major points:
The authors conclude that the apparently bigger forceps (Jumbo-forceps) yield
better results than the standard forceps as demonstrated by a higher
transepithelial resistance and appearance of the tissue. Keeping in mind that a
significant fraction of investigators using transepithelial measurements across
colonic mucosae it would be worthwhile comparing these data with those
obtained with suction biopsies. The latter are even less invasive than forceps but
very little is reported on transepithelial resistance of tissue samples obtained
through suction. The authors should compare their data with the literature
published by the Rotterdam group that pioneered the technique in the beginning
of the 90s.
The authors also report that bowel preparation with isotonic saline gives better
results than using either glycerol or mannitol. The latter two (or osmotically active
salt solutions in general) are presumably working osmotically and are rather
more frequently used as laxatives prior to abdominal surgery than saline. Could
the authors speculate why glycerol and/or mannitol respectively have a negative
effect on the tissue quality?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
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:Rectal Biopsies Procedure in Cystic Fibrosis: Technical Aspects and
Patients Perspective for Clinical Trials Feasibility
Version: 1Date:20 November 2012
Reviewer: Martin Hug
Reviewer's report:
The paper by Maria Servidoni and coworkers compares several different
procedures to obtain rectal biopsies with respect to tissue integrity and tolerability
of the entire procedure for the patients. The study accumulates a significant
number of data and is to my best knowledge one of the first publications
including PROs with respect to the diagnosis of Cystic Fibrosis.
Major points:
The authors conclude that the apparently bigger forceps (Jumbo-forceps) yield
better results than the standard forceps as demonstrated by a higher
transepithelial resistance and appearance of the tissue. Keeping in mind that a
significant fraction of investigators using transepithelial measurements across
colonic mucosae it would be worthwhile comparing these data with those
obtained with suction biopsies. The latter are even less invasive than forceps but
very little is reported on transepithelial resistance of tissue samples obtained
through suction. The authors should compare their data with the literature
published by the Rotterdam group that pioneered the technique in the beginning
of the 90s.
The authors also report that bowel preparation with isotonic saline gives better
results than using either glycerol or mannitol. The latter two (or osmotically active
salt solutions in general) are presumably working osmotically and are rather
more frequently used as laxatives prior to abdominal surgery than saline. Could
the authors speculate why glycerol and/or mannitol respectively have a negative
effect on the tissue quality?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
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