Reviewer's report
Title:Fully covered self-expandable metal stents (SEMS), partially covered
SEMS and self-expandable plastic stents for the treatment of benign esophageal
ruptures and anastomotic leaks
Version: 2Date:16 November 2011
Reviewer: Manon Spaander
Reviewer's report:
van Boeckel et al review their experience on fully covered self-expandable metal
stents (SEMS), partial covered SEMS and plastic stent for the treatment of
benign esophageal rupture and anastomotic leakage. The authors evaluated the
efficacy of these different stents and found no significant differences between
them.
Minor comment:
- Stents were placed for different indications, namely anastomotic leak, iatrogenic
rupture, Boerhaave's syndrome and other causes. Were the different stents
(equally) divided for the different indications or did the attending physician prefer
one of these stents in a specific indication?
-How many days- months after stent removal were patients in follow up. What
was the follow-up time?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
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:Fully covered self-expandable metal stents (SEMS), partially covered
SEMS and self-expandable plastic stents for the treatment of benign esophageal
ruptures and anastomotic leaks
Version: 2Date:16 November 2011
Reviewer: Manon Spaander
Reviewer's report:
van Boeckel et al review their experience on fully covered self-expandable metal
stents (SEMS), partial covered SEMS and plastic stent for the treatment of
benign esophageal rupture and anastomotic leakage. The authors evaluated the
efficacy of these different stents and found no significant differences between
them.
Minor comment:
- Stents were placed for different indications, namely anastomotic leak, iatrogenic
rupture, Boerhaave's syndrome and other causes. Were the different stents
(equally) divided for the different indications or did the attending physician prefer
one of these stents in a specific indication?
-How many days- months after stent removal were patients in follow up. What
was the follow-up time?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
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:Fully covered self-expandable metal stents (SEMS), partially covered
SEMS and self-expandable plastic stents for the treatment of benign esophageal
ruptures and anastomotic leaks
Version: 2Date:16 November 2011
Reviewer: Manon Spaander
Reviewer's report:
van Boeckel et al review their experience on fully covered self-expandable metal
stents (SEMS), partial covered SEMS and plastic stent for the treatment of
benign esophageal rupture and anastomotic leakage. The authors evaluated the
efficacy of these different stents and found no significant differences between
them.
Minor comment:
- Stents were placed for different indications, namely anastomotic leak, iatrogenic
rupture, Boerhaave's syndrome and other causes. Were the different stents
(equally) divided for the different indications or did the attending physician prefer
one of these stents in a specific indication?
-How many days- months after stent removal were patients in follow up. What
was the follow-up time?
Level of interest: An article of importance in its field
Quality of written English: Acceptable
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