Reviewer's report
Title:Commonly used bowel preparations have significant and different effects
upon cell proliferation in the colon: a pilot study
Version: 1Date:19 June 2008
Reviewer: Robert A Goodlad
Reviewer's report:
The authors describe some changes in cell proliferation following preparation
with Picolax [actively draw water into the bowel lumen] – and Prep, a lavage
solution with some osmotic activity
The Number of subjects is rather low but nevertheless some significant
differences were observed. The results have some relevance and are worth
publishing.
Other points
(p=0.0192) and pHH3 (p=0.0170) suggest round up
“floor-to-ceiling” please elaborate
No effect in HNPCC – there have been reports of much increased crypt fission in
FAP see Wasan h et al.
Value of methods and applicability to biopsy samples should be elaborated i.e.
PCNA is of dubious value as it has anomalous results and is difficult to
standardize and micro dissection allows many crypts to be studied. – See Hall P
and see Alferez and Goodlad in Cell Proliferation
Were effects of food intake [or lack of it] the same? I.e. were the unpreped
starved in a similar manner. Should discuss the concepts of luminal
nutrition/luminal workload.
Reviewer's report
Title:Commonly used bowel preparations have significant and different effects
upon cell proliferation in the colon: a pilot study
Version: 1Date:19 June 2008
Reviewer: Robert A Goodlad
Reviewer's report:
The authors describe some changes in cell proliferation following preparation
with Picolax [actively draw water into the bowel lumen] – and Prep, a lavage
solution with some osmotic activity
The Number of subjects is rather low but nevertheless some significant
differences were observed. The results have some relevance and are worth
publishing.
Other points
(p=0.0192) and pHH3 (p=0.0170) suggest round up
“floor-to-ceiling” please elaborate
No effect in HNPCC – there have been reports of much increased crypt fission in
FAP see Wasan h et al.
Value of methods and applicability to biopsy samples should be elaborated i.e.
PCNA is of dubious value as it has anomalous results and is difficult to
standardize and micro dissection allows many crypts to be studied. – See Hall P
and see Alferez and Goodlad in Cell Proliferation
Were effects of food intake [or lack of it] the same? I.e. were the unpreped
starved in a similar manner. Should discuss the concepts of luminal
nutrition/luminal workload.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Commonly used bowel preparations have significant and different effects
upon cell proliferation in the colon: a pilot study
Version: 1Date:19 June 2008
Reviewer: Robert A Goodlad
Reviewer's report:
The authors describe some changes in cell proliferation following preparation
with Picolax [actively draw water into the bowel lumen] – and Prep, a lavage
solution with some osmotic activity
The Number of subjects is rather low but nevertheless some significant
differences were observed. The results have some relevance and are worth
publishing.
Other points
(p=0.0192) and pHH3 (p=0.0170) suggest round up
“floor-to-ceiling” please elaborate
No effect in HNPCC – there have been reports of much increased crypt fission in
FAP see Wasan h et al.
Value of methods and applicability to biopsy samples should be elaborated i.e.
PCNA is of dubious value as it has anomalous results and is difficult to
standardize and micro dissection allows many crypts to be studied. – See Hall P
and see Alferez and Goodlad in Cell Proliferation
Were effects of food intake [or lack of it] the same? I.e. were the unpreped
starved in a similar manner. Should discuss the concepts of luminal
nutrition/luminal workload.
assistant