Title: Efficacy of washed microbiota transplantation for therapeutic targets of refractory
functional constipation and the influencing factors: A single-center, retrospective, 24-week
follow-up study
Version: 2 Date: 29 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
Minor comments:
1. Line 85-88: The therapeutic potential of FMT in refractory FC has recently been demonstrated
[18-21]. These studies demonstrated that FMT may relieve refractory FC by reconstructing gut
microbiota and improving colonic transit time [6, 19-22]. The rate of response from Liquan Wu
is more close to the reality in clinical practice. However, it seems like that the rate of positive
response in the cited reports are much higher. What is the reason? The combined medication
with FMT should be stated and discussed clearly in those selected population according to their
serials reports. So, the difference should be discussed clearly for not causing misunderstanding.
Or avoid this point by other way? Additionally, “refractory FC has recently been demonstrated”
is not proper. “demonstrated” or reported#
2. The conclusion in Abstract: “The efficacy is increased with more than one course of WMT”
can be changed as “The effectiveness of WMT via colonic TET in the management of FC is
enhanced with the administration of multiple courses.”
3. In Key Words (line 57-58): 1. Change washed microbiota transplantation as “fecal microbiota
transplantation” for improving the increases the likelihood of this article being retrieved in
searches; 2. Delete “refractory”.
Title: Efficacy of washed microbiota transplantation for therapeutic targets of refractory
functional constipation and the influencing factors: A single-center, retrospective, 24-week
follow-up study
Version: 2 Date: 29 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
Minor comments:
1. Line 85-88: The therapeutic potential of FMT in refractory FC has recently been demonstrated
[18-21]. These studies demonstrated that FMT may relieve refractory FC by reconstructing gut
microbiota and improving colonic transit time [6, 19-22]. The rate of response from Liquan Wu
is more close to the reality in clinical practice. However, it seems like that the rate of positive
response in the cited reports are much higher. What is the reason? The combined medication
with FMT should be stated and discussed clearly in those selected population according to their
serials reports. So, the difference should be discussed clearly for not causing misunderstanding.
Or avoid this point by other way? Additionally, “refractory FC has recently been demonstrated”
is not proper. “demonstrated” or reported#
2. The conclusion in Abstract: “The efficacy is increased with more than one course of WMT”
can be changed as “The effectiveness of WMT via colonic TET in the management of FC is
enhanced with the administration of multiple courses.”
3. In Key Words (line 57-58): 1. Change washed microbiota transplantation as “fecal microbiota
transplantation” for improving the increases the likelihood of this article being retrieved in
searches; 2. Delete “refractory”.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Efficacy of washed microbiota transplantation for therapeutic targets of refractory
functional constipation and the influencing factors: A single-center, retrospective, 24-week
follow-up study
Version: 2 Date: 29 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
Minor comments:
1. Line 85-88: The therapeutic potential of FMT in refractory FC has recently been demonstrated
[18-21]. These studies demonstrated that FMT may relieve refractory FC by reconstructing gut
microbiota and improving colonic transit time [6, 19-22]. The rate of response from Liquan Wu
is more close to the reality in clinical practice. However, it seems like that the rate of positive
response in the cited reports are much higher. What is the reason? The combined medication
with FMT should be stated and discussed clearly in those selected population according to their
serials reports. So, the difference should be discussed clearly for not causing misunderstanding.
Or avoid this point by other way? Additionally, “refractory FC has recently been demonstrated”
is not proper. “demonstrated” or reported#
2. The conclusion in Abstract: “The efficacy is increased with more than one course of WMT”
can be changed as “The effectiveness of WMT via colonic TET in the management of FC is
enhanced with the administration of multiple courses.”
3. In Key Words (line 57-58): 1. Change washed microbiota transplantation as “fecal microbiota
transplantation” for improving the increases the likelihood of this article being retrieved in
searches; 2. Delete “refractory”.
assistant