Reviewer's report 
 Colorectal tumors with complete obstruction - Endoscopic recovery of passage replacing emergency Title: 
surgery? A report of two cases 
 3  4 November 2006 Version: Date: 
 Diarmuid O'Riordain Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
Manuscript describes two interesting cases but is of more anecdotal than scientific interest and describes 
techniques and an approach which is not new. The suggestion in the conclusions that this approach merits 
a prospective trial is a good one. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
-------- 
The quality of written english is in places poor though it is possible at all times to understand the points being made by the authors. This is a consistent trend throughout the manuscript. Problems include poorly 
constructed phrases and inappropriate use of words. Examples of the former: Abstract line 3 'reduced 
status of the frequently old patients', abstract line 9 'The patients relieved from' and introduction line 1 'is among the most frequent cancer'. Examples of the latter include abstract line 4 'part' abstract line 5 'reopening' abstract line 12 'instantly'. 
Introduction Lines 7-11 - description of the surgical approach to acute colonic obstruction as being 'three 
stage' beginning with defunctioning is very dated and not standard modern practice. Surgical resection of the primary at first operation would be the most widely performed procedure. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article of limited interest Level of interest: 
 Needs some language corrections before being published Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests. 
Reviewer's report 
 Colorectal tumors with complete obstruction - Endoscopic recovery of passage replacing emergency Title: 
surgery? A report of two cases 
 3  4 November 2006 Version: Date: 
 Diarmuid O'Riordain Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
Manuscript describes two interesting cases but is of more anecdotal than scientific interest and describes 
techniques and an approach which is not new. The suggestion in the conclusions that this approach merits 
a prospective trial is a good one. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
-------- 
The quality of written english is in places poor though it is possible at all times to understand the points being made by the authors. This is a consistent trend throughout the manuscript. Problems include poorly 
constructed phrases and inappropriate use of words. Examples of the former: Abstract line 3 'reduced 
status of the frequently old patients', abstract line 9 'The patients relieved from' and introduction line 1 'is among the most frequent cancer'. Examples of the latter include abstract line 4 'part' abstract line 5 'reopening' abstract line 12 'instantly'. 
Introduction Lines 7-11 - description of the surgical approach to acute colonic obstruction as being 'three 
stage' beginning with defunctioning is very dated and not standard modern practice. Surgical resection of the primary at first operation would be the most widely performed procedure. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article of limited interest Level of interest: 
 Needs some language corrections before being published Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests. 
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report 
 Colorectal tumors with complete obstruction - Endoscopic recovery of passage replacing emergency Title: 
surgery? A report of two cases 
 3  4 November 2006 Version: Date: 
 Diarmuid O'Riordain Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
Manuscript describes two interesting cases but is of more anecdotal than scientific interest and describes 
techniques and an approach which is not new. The suggestion in the conclusions that this approach merits 
a prospective trial is a good one. 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Major Compulsory Revisions (that the author must respond to before a decision on publication can be reached) 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Minor Essential Revisions (such as missing labels on figures, or the wrong use of a term, which the author can be trusted to correct) 
-------- 
The quality of written english is in places poor though it is possible at all times to understand the points being made by the authors. This is a consistent trend throughout the manuscript. Problems include poorly 
constructed phrases and inappropriate use of words. Examples of the former: Abstract line 3 'reduced 
status of the frequently old patients', abstract line 9 'The patients relieved from' and introduction line 1 'is among the most frequent cancer'. Examples of the latter include abstract line 4 'part' abstract line 5 'reopening' abstract line 12 'instantly'. 
Introduction Lines 7-11 - description of the surgical approach to acute colonic obstruction as being 'three 
stage' beginning with defunctioning is very dated and not standard modern practice. Surgical resection of the primary at first operation would be the most widely performed procedure. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article of limited interest Level of interest: 
 Needs some language corrections before being published Quality of written English: 
 No Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
I declare that I have no competing interests. 
assistant