Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Relationship between angiography timing and angiographic visualization of extravasation in
patients with acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding
Version: 
2 
Date: 
04 Oct 2020
Reviewer's report:
The authors are reporting interesting data. I recommend the publication in this journal. However, the
current revisions are not satisfactory. It should be more important to explore the factors associated with
clinical success and mortality in patients with acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding who are treated
with angiographic embolization. In the authors' responses, the authors said "angiographic visualization of
extravasation decreased the clinical success rate (ORs: 0.401, 95% CI:0.165-0.974)" and "clinical success
decreased the 30-day all-cause mortality (ORs: 0.001, 95% CI: 0.000-0.109)". If so, this paper is of little
significance. I guess that your statistical analysis may be problematic. Additionally, another cause for this
unexpected phenomenon should be that negative "angiographic visualization of extravasation" indicates
less severe disease and better outcomes. I suspected that some cases of negative "angiographic
visualization of extravasation" 
may have conservative therapy alone, but lower requirement of
embolization.
I suggest that the authors should separately analyze the risk factors for the outcomes (mortality) in patients
with and without "angiographic visualization of extravasation".
Procedures regarding blind embolization are still unclear. How to select a target vessel to release your
embolization agent should be introduced in details. More detailed information should be given in the
figure legend.
Publons Reviewer Recognition
. Springer Nature can send verification of this review directly to Publons
(a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would like to take advantage of this service, please click on
the “Yes” option below. Your name, email address, title of the reviewed manuscript, name of the journal,
and date of your review submission (the “Review Data”) will then be transmitted to Publons upon
publication of the manuscript. If you have already registered at Publons, they will notify you of the receipt
of this review and update your profile 
as per your settings and their policy. If you are not registered with
Publons, you will receive an email from them asking you to register in order for them to be able to
recognize your review on your new profile page. Publons may use the Review Data to generate derivative
metadata for the benefit of Publons and you as a reviewer, carefully considering the sensitivity of such
information. For example, Publons may verify your record as a reviewer by updating your profile
published on its webservice if you have registered for such service or help editors to identify candidate
reviewers. Please find the details of processing in Publons’ privacy policy
https://publons.com/about/terms
Yes
Declaration of competing interests
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:
1
. 
Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this manuscript,
either now or in the future?
2
. 
Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially
from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?
3
. 
Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the content of the manuscript?
4
. 
Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that holds or has
applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?
5
. 
Do you have any other financial competing interests?
6
. 
Do you have any non-financial competing interests in relation to this paper?
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' below. If your
reply is yes to any, please give details below.
I declare that I have no competin interests.
Reviewer Publication Consent.
 I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access
Creative Commons CC-BY License (
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
) if this manuscript is
accepted for publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the published report have
been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not be published.
If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the editorial office before completing
the review.
If you wish, you can include your name in your published report. Please note you must decide whether
to include your name at the start of the process and confirm this decision whenever prompted. If you
change your decision later, we will not be able to publish your name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please 
do not
 publish my name with my report. (default)
Is the study design appropriate to answer the research question (including the use of appropriate controls),
and are the conclusions supported by the evidence presented?
Yes
Are the methods sufficiently described to allow the study to be repeated?
No
Is the use of statistics and treatment of uncertainties appropriate?
No
Is the presentation of the work clear?
No
Are the images in this manuscript (including electrophoretic gels and blots) free from apparent
manipulation?
Yes
Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Relationship between angiography timing and angiographic visualization of extravasation in
patients with acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding
Version: 
2 
Date: 
04 Oct 2020
Reviewer's report:
The authors are reporting interesting data. I recommend the publication in this journal. However, the
current revisions are not satisfactory. It should be more important to explore the factors associated with
clinical success and mortality in patients with acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding who are treated
with angiographic embolization. In the authors' responses, the authors said "angiographic visualization of
extravasation decreased the clinical success rate (ORs: 0.401, 95% CI:0.165-0.974)" and "clinical success
decreased the 30-day all-cause mortality (ORs: 0.001, 95% CI: 0.000-0.109)". If so, this paper is of little
significance. I guess that your statistical analysis may be problematic. Additionally, another cause for this
unexpected phenomenon should be that negative "angiographic visualization of extravasation" indicates
less severe disease and better outcomes. I suspected that some cases of negative "angiographic
visualization of extravasation" 
may have conservative therapy alone, but lower requirement of
embolization.
I suggest that the authors should separately analyze the risk factors for the outcomes (mortality) in patients
with and without "angiographic visualization of extravasation".
Procedures regarding blind embolization are still unclear. How to select a target vessel to release your
embolization agent should be introduced in details. More detailed information should be given in the
figure legend.
Publons Reviewer Recognition
. Springer Nature can send verification of this review directly to Publons
(a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would like to take advantage of this service, please click on
the “Yes” option below. Your name, email address, title of the reviewed manuscript, name of the journal,
and date of your review submission (the “Review Data”) will then be transmitted to Publons upon
publication of the manuscript. If you have already registered at Publons, they will notify you of the receipt
of this review and update your profile 
as per your settings and their policy. If you are not registered with
Publons, you will receive an email from them asking you to register in order for them to be able to
recognize your review on your new profile page. Publons may use the Review Data to generate derivative
metadata for the benefit of Publons and you as a reviewer, carefully considering the sensitivity of such
information. For example, Publons may verify your record as a reviewer by updating your profile
published on its webservice if you have registered for such service or help editors to identify candidate
reviewers. Please find the details of processing in Publons’ privacy policy
https://publons.com/about/terms
Yes
Declaration of competing interests
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:
1
. 
Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this manuscript,
either now or in the future?
2
. 
Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially
from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?
3
. 
Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the content of the manuscript?
4
. 
Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that holds or has
applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?
5
. 
Do you have any other financial competing interests?
6
. 
Do you have any non-financial competing interests in relation to this paper?
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' below. If your
reply is yes to any, please give details below.
I declare that I have no competin interests.
Reviewer Publication Consent.
 I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access
Creative Commons CC-BY License (
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
) if this manuscript is
accepted for publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the published report have
been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not be published.
If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the editorial office before completing
the review.
If you wish, you can include your name in your published report. Please note you must decide whether
to include your name at the start of the process and confirm this decision whenever prompted. If you
change your decision later, we will not be able to publish your name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please 
do not
 publish my name with my report. (default)
Is the study design appropriate to answer the research question (including the use of appropriate controls),
and are the conclusions supported by the evidence presented?
Yes
Are the methods sufficiently described to allow the study to be repeated?
No
Is the use of statistics and treatment of uncertainties appropriate?
No
Is the presentation of the work clear?
No
Are the images in this manuscript (including electrophoretic gels and blots) free from apparent
manipulation?
Yes
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer’s report
Title: 
Relationship between angiography timing and angiographic visualization of extravasation in
patients with acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding
Version: 
2 
Date: 
04 Oct 2020
Reviewer's report:
The authors are reporting interesting data. I recommend the publication in this journal. However, the
current revisions are not satisfactory. It should be more important to explore the factors associated with
clinical success and mortality in patients with acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding who are treated
with angiographic embolization. In the authors' responses, the authors said "angiographic visualization of
extravasation decreased the clinical success rate (ORs: 0.401, 95% CI:0.165-0.974)" and "clinical success
decreased the 30-day all-cause mortality (ORs: 0.001, 95% CI: 0.000-0.109)". If so, this paper is of little
significance. I guess that your statistical analysis may be problematic. Additionally, another cause for this
unexpected phenomenon should be that negative "angiographic visualization of extravasation" indicates
less severe disease and better outcomes. I suspected that some cases of negative "angiographic
visualization of extravasation" 
may have conservative therapy alone, but lower requirement of
embolization.
I suggest that the authors should separately analyze the risk factors for the outcomes (mortality) in patients
with and without "angiographic visualization of extravasation".
Procedures regarding blind embolization are still unclear. How to select a target vessel to release your
embolization agent should be introduced in details. More detailed information should be given in the
figure legend.
Publons Reviewer Recognition
. Springer Nature can send verification of this review directly to Publons
(a subsidiary of Clarivate Analytics). If you would like to take advantage of this service, please click on
the “Yes” option below. Your name, email address, title of the reviewed manuscript, name of the journal,
and date of your review submission (the “Review Data”) will then be transmitted to Publons upon
publication of the manuscript. If you have already registered at Publons, they will notify you of the receipt
of this review and update your profile 
as per your settings and their policy. If you are not registered with
Publons, you will receive an email from them asking you to register in order for them to be able to
recognize your review on your new profile page. Publons may use the Review Data to generate derivative
metadata for the benefit of Publons and you as a reviewer, carefully considering the sensitivity of such
information. For example, Publons may verify your record as a reviewer by updating your profile
published on its webservice if you have registered for such service or help editors to identify candidate
reviewers. Please find the details of processing in Publons’ privacy policy
https://publons.com/about/terms
Yes
Declaration of competing interests
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:
1
. 
Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this manuscript,
either now or in the future?
2
. 
Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially
from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?
3
. 
Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the content of the manuscript?
4
. 
Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that holds or has
applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?
5
. 
Do you have any other financial competing interests?
6
. 
Do you have any non-financial competing interests in relation to this paper?
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' below. If your
reply is yes to any, please give details below.
I declare that I have no competin interests.
Reviewer Publication Consent.
 I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access
Creative Commons CC-BY License (
 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
) if this manuscript is
accepted for publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the published report have
been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not be published.
If you are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the editorial office before completing
the review.
If you wish, you can include your name in your published report. Please note you must decide whether
to include your name at the start of the process and confirm this decision whenever prompted. If you
change your decision later, we will not be able to publish your name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please 
do not
 publish my name with my report. (default)
Is the study design appropriate to answer the research question (including the use of appropriate controls),
and are the conclusions supported by the evidence presented?
Yes
Are the methods sufficiently described to allow the study to be repeated?
No
Is the use of statistics and treatment of uncertainties appropriate?
No
Is the presentation of the work clear?
No
Are the images in this manuscript (including electrophoretic gels and blots) free from apparent
manipulation?
Yes
assistant