Title: Diagnostic value of T-tube cholangiography and choledochoscopy in residual calculi after
biliary surgery
Version: 6 Date: 16 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thanks to the authors for they efforts, the manuscript has been improved and I think it is ready
to publish.
Regarding this topic:
Authors Response: The authors explain that they focused on diagnostic concordance and that
the evaluation of sensitivity and specificity was intentionally not included. They will clarify this
in the Methods section.
My thoughts and suggestion: The response is valid in the context of the study's objective.
However, adding information about sensitivity and specificity could have provided more context
regarding the effectiveness of each method. The clarification in the Methods will help readers
understand the approach.
Title: Diagnostic value of T-tube cholangiography and choledochoscopy in residual calculi after
biliary surgery
Version: 6 Date: 16 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thanks to the authors for they efforts, the manuscript has been improved and I think it is ready
to publish.
Regarding this topic:
Authors Response: The authors explain that they focused on diagnostic concordance and that
the evaluation of sensitivity and specificity was intentionally not included. They will clarify this
in the Methods section.
My thoughts and suggestion: The response is valid in the context of the study's objective.
However, adding information about sensitivity and specificity could have provided more context
regarding the effectiveness of each method. The clarification in the Methods will help readers
understand the approach.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Diagnostic value of T-tube cholangiography and choledochoscopy in residual calculi after
biliary surgery
Version: 6 Date: 16 Oct 2024
Reviewer's report:
Thanks to the authors for they efforts, the manuscript has been improved and I think it is ready
to publish.
Regarding this topic:
Authors Response: The authors explain that they focused on diagnostic concordance and that
the evaluation of sensitivity and specificity was intentionally not included. They will clarify this
in the Methods section.
My thoughts and suggestion: The response is valid in the context of the study's objective.
However, adding information about sensitivity and specificity could have provided more context
regarding the effectiveness of each method. The clarification in the Methods will help readers
understand the approach.
assistant