Reviewer's report
Title:The role of aspirin in post-polypectomy bleeding a retrospective survey
Version: 2Date:18 June 2012
Reviewer: Dimitrios Kapetanos
Reviewer's report:
This is a retrospective study on the risk of post polypectomy bleeding in patients
receiving aspirin. It concludes, in contrast to recent guidelines, that the risk is
substantial and that we should treat these patients with caution. The major
limitation of the study is the retrospective design and we must assume that
important parameters were retrieved for all patients.
Minor Essential Revisions
1. Reference 10 is missing in the text.
2. In the methods section the third sentence from the end (patients were
excluded...) is not easily understood.
3. The severity of hemorrhage (only readmission, transfusion, surgery) should be
mentioned.
4. Reference 15 is discussed before reference 14.
Major Compulsory Revisions
1. In the introduction and discussion section reference 9 is misleading as it is
based in old data.
2. In the results section, in the polypectomy techniques, the type of current (cut,
coagulation) used should be stated. The type of polypectomy technique in
patients who bled should be stated too. Was any preventive haemostatic method
(clips, injection of adrenaline solution, endoloops etc) used?
3. In the discussion section, the risk of an event with temporary discontinuation of
aspirin (primary and secondary prevention) should be discussed.
4. The authors should also discuss the recent European guidelines and the also
recent large prospective and retrospective studies on the risk of hemorrhage
while patients were on aspirin.
5. The authors should also state how do they treat patients on aspirin and what
preventive measures they undertake in order to minimize the risk of post
polypectomy bleeding.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
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.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:The role of aspirin in post-polypectomy bleeding a retrospective survey
Version: 2Date:18 June 2012
Reviewer: Dimitrios Kapetanos
Reviewer's report:
This is a retrospective study on the risk of post polypectomy bleeding in patients
receiving aspirin. It concludes, in contrast to recent guidelines, that the risk is
substantial and that we should treat these patients with caution. The major
limitation of the study is the retrospective design and we must assume that
important parameters were retrieved for all patients.
Minor Essential Revisions
1. Reference 10 is missing in the text.
2. In the methods section the third sentence from the end (patients were
excluded...) is not easily understood.
3. The severity of hemorrhage (only readmission, transfusion, surgery) should be
mentioned.
4. Reference 15 is discussed before reference 14.
Major Compulsory Revisions
1. In the introduction and discussion section reference 9 is misleading as it is
based in old data.
2. In the results section, in the polypectomy techniques, the type of current (cut,
coagulation) used should be stated. The type of polypectomy technique in
patients who bled should be stated too. Was any preventive haemostatic method
(clips, injection of adrenaline solution, endoloops etc) used?
3. In the discussion section, the risk of an event with temporary discontinuation of
aspirin (primary and secondary prevention) should be discussed.
4. The authors should also discuss the recent European guidelines and the also
recent large prospective and retrospective studies on the risk of hemorrhage
while patients were on aspirin.
5. The authors should also state how do they treat patients on aspirin and what
preventive measures they undertake in order to minimize the risk of post
polypectomy bleeding.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
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.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:The role of aspirin in post-polypectomy bleeding a retrospective survey
Version: 2Date:18 June 2012
Reviewer: Dimitrios Kapetanos
Reviewer's report:
This is a retrospective study on the risk of post polypectomy bleeding in patients
receiving aspirin. It concludes, in contrast to recent guidelines, that the risk is
substantial and that we should treat these patients with caution. The major
limitation of the study is the retrospective design and we must assume that
important parameters were retrieved for all patients.
Minor Essential Revisions
1. Reference 10 is missing in the text.
2. In the methods section the third sentence from the end (patients were
excluded...) is not easily understood.
3. The severity of hemorrhage (only readmission, transfusion, surgery) should be
mentioned.
4. Reference 15 is discussed before reference 14.
Major Compulsory Revisions
1. In the introduction and discussion section reference 9 is misleading as it is
based in old data.
2. In the results section, in the polypectomy techniques, the type of current (cut,
coagulation) used should be stated. The type of polypectomy technique in
patients who bled should be stated too. Was any preventive haemostatic method
(clips, injection of adrenaline solution, endoloops etc) used?
3. In the discussion section, the risk of an event with temporary discontinuation of
aspirin (primary and secondary prevention) should be discussed.
4. The authors should also discuss the recent European guidelines and the also
recent large prospective and retrospective studies on the risk of hemorrhage
while patients were on aspirin.
5. The authors should also state how do they treat patients on aspirin and what
preventive measures they undertake in order to minimize the risk of post
polypectomy bleeding.
Level of interest: An article whose findings are important to those with closely
related research interests
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.
Declaration of competing interests:
I declare that I have no competing interests.
assistant