Reviewer's report
Title:Comparability of localization data in transnasal and transoral
esophagogastroduodenoscopy
Version: 2Date:7 August 2010
Reviewer: Akihiro Mori
Reviewer's report:
The aim of this study was to compare the localization data obtained with the
transoral and transnasal methods. The authors reported there was a strong
correlation between the localization details obtained with both examination
methods, and also the formula for converting localization details between two
methods was practicable for everyday use and allowed rapid conversion. Their
conclusion is interesting. However, there are 2 main issues that concern me.
# Major concerns
1. When a gastroscopy is converted from transnasal to transoral, it would be
more suitable to use a conventional endoscope (larger diameter) because it has
higher resolution than an ultrathin endoscope. The authors performed a transoral
gastroscopy with an ultrathin endoscope. They should comment that their
formula is available for converting localization details even if a conventional
endoscope is used.
2. Although their formula can be used in the location from the cardia to the naris
or upper incisors, it is unusable in the post-cardiac location because the
endoscope shaft is bent in the stomach. Moreover, there must be differences
between a conventional (larger diameter) endoscope and an ultrathin endoscope.
The authors should comment to this remark.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Reviewer's report
Title:Comparability of localization data in transnasal and transoral
esophagogastroduodenoscopy
Version: 2Date:7 August 2010
Reviewer: Akihiro Mori
Reviewer's report:
The aim of this study was to compare the localization data obtained with the
transoral and transnasal methods. The authors reported there was a strong
correlation between the localization details obtained with both examination
methods, and also the formula for converting localization details between two
methods was practicable for everyday use and allowed rapid conversion. Their
conclusion is interesting. However, there are 2 main issues that concern me.
# Major concerns
1. When a gastroscopy is converted from transnasal to transoral, it would be
more suitable to use a conventional endoscope (larger diameter) because it has
higher resolution than an ultrathin endoscope. The authors performed a transoral
gastroscopy with an ultrathin endoscope. They should comment that their
formula is available for converting localization details even if a conventional
endoscope is used.
2. Although their formula can be used in the location from the cardia to the naris
or upper incisors, it is unusable in the post-cardiac location because the
endoscope shaft is bent in the stomach. Moreover, there must be differences
between a conventional (larger diameter) endoscope and an ultrathin endoscope.
The authors should comment to this remark.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Comparability of localization data in transnasal and transoral
esophagogastroduodenoscopy
Version: 2Date:7 August 2010
Reviewer: Akihiro Mori
Reviewer's report:
The aim of this study was to compare the localization data obtained with the
transoral and transnasal methods. The authors reported there was a strong
correlation between the localization details obtained with both examination
methods, and also the formula for converting localization details between two
methods was practicable for everyday use and allowed rapid conversion. Their
conclusion is interesting. However, there are 2 main issues that concern me.
# Major concerns
1. When a gastroscopy is converted from transnasal to transoral, it would be
more suitable to use a conventional endoscope (larger diameter) because it has
higher resolution than an ultrathin endoscope. The authors performed a transoral
gastroscopy with an ultrathin endoscope. They should comment that their
formula is available for converting localization details even if a conventional
endoscope is used.
2. Although their formula can be used in the location from the cardia to the naris
or upper incisors, it is unusable in the post-cardiac location because the
endoscope shaft is bent in the stomach. Moreover, there must be differences
between a conventional (larger diameter) endoscope and an ultrathin endoscope.
The authors should comment to this remark.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
assistant