Reviewer's report
Title:Cholecystomucoclasis: Revaluation of Safety and Validity in the Aged
Population
Version: 2Date:20 May 2012
Reviewer: luca antonio aldrighetti
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
I believe that this is a retrospective study where patients were enrolled to
Cholecystomucoclasis or standard cholecystectomy on the basis of
intraoperative findings. There is therefore a selection bias but I think that this is
consistent with the aim of he study (to understand if Cholecystomucoclasis may
be offered in complex cases instead of cholecystectomy) so it doesn't damage
the value of the paper
Minor Essential Revision
I would suggest the authors to discuss the role of ERCP in treating biliary fistula
in patients treated both by standard cholecystectomy and Cholecystomucoclasis
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Reviewer's report
Title:Cholecystomucoclasis: Revaluation of Safety and Validity in the Aged
Population
Version: 2Date:20 May 2012
Reviewer: luca antonio aldrighetti
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
I believe that this is a retrospective study where patients were enrolled to
Cholecystomucoclasis or standard cholecystectomy on the basis of
intraoperative findings. There is therefore a selection bias but I think that this is
consistent with the aim of he study (to understand if Cholecystomucoclasis may
be offered in complex cases instead of cholecystectomy) so it doesn't damage
the value of the paper
Minor Essential Revision
I would suggest the authors to discuss the role of ERCP in treating biliary fistula
in patients treated both by standard cholecystectomy and Cholecystomucoclasis
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Cholecystomucoclasis: Revaluation of Safety and Validity in the Aged
Population
Version: 2Date:20 May 2012
Reviewer: luca antonio aldrighetti
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
I believe that this is a retrospective study where patients were enrolled to
Cholecystomucoclasis or standard cholecystectomy on the basis of
intraoperative findings. There is therefore a selection bias but I think that this is
consistent with the aim of he study (to understand if Cholecystomucoclasis may
be offered in complex cases instead of cholecystectomy) so it doesn't damage
the value of the paper
Minor Essential Revision
I would suggest the authors to discuss the role of ERCP in treating biliary fistula
in patients treated both by standard cholecystectomy and Cholecystomucoclasis
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Needs some language corrections before being
published
Statistical review: No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a
statistician.
assistant