Reviewer's report
Title:Bowel necrosis following endovascular revascularization for chronic
mesenteric ischemia: report of a case and review of literatures
Version: 2Date:25 April 2013
Reviewer: Slobodan Tanaskovic
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
This manuscript describes serious complications following SMA angioplasty for
intestinal ischemia. There are several major drawbacks of this case.
1) As mentioned in the manuscript, bowel ischemia after visceral arteries
angioplasty has been previously described and this case has no remarkable
exceptions.
2) This patient already had distal ileum and ascending colon ischemia prior to
intervention and this fact significantly contributed to unfavorable outcome.
3) In addition to bowel ischemia this patient had postoperative myocardial
infarction and liver abscess that were the main reasons for lethal outcome. The
authors responded immediately after angioplasty and bowel resection was
performed on the second day. If no myocardial infarction or liver abscess
occurred this patient might have survived.
4) The authors should should comment why they didn't use embolic protection
bearing in mind previously described embolic complications?
5) The authors should comment on stent use in SMA angioplasty? How does it
differ from angioplasty alone in the terms of distal embolization?
Minor Essential Revisions
English should be improved.
References are incorrectly written. In almost all of them ";" should be placed
instead od "," after the name of the Journal and the year of publication.
Figures should be improved.
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
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 have no financial or non-financial competing interests.
Reviewer's report
Title:Bowel necrosis following endovascular revascularization for chronic
mesenteric ischemia: report of a case and review of literatures
Version: 2Date:25 April 2013
Reviewer: Slobodan Tanaskovic
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
This manuscript describes serious complications following SMA angioplasty for
intestinal ischemia. There are several major drawbacks of this case.
1) As mentioned in the manuscript, bowel ischemia after visceral arteries
angioplasty has been previously described and this case has no remarkable
exceptions.
2) This patient already had distal ileum and ascending colon ischemia prior to
intervention and this fact significantly contributed to unfavorable outcome.
3) In addition to bowel ischemia this patient had postoperative myocardial
infarction and liver abscess that were the main reasons for lethal outcome. The
authors responded immediately after angioplasty and bowel resection was
performed on the second day. If no myocardial infarction or liver abscess
occurred this patient might have survived.
4) The authors should should comment why they didn't use embolic protection
bearing in mind previously described embolic complications?
5) The authors should comment on stent use in SMA angioplasty? How does it
differ from angioplasty alone in the terms of distal embolization?
Minor Essential Revisions
English should be improved.
References are incorrectly written. In almost all of them ";" should be placed
instead od "," after the name of the Journal and the year of publication.
Figures should be improved.
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
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 have no financial or non-financial competing interests.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Bowel necrosis following endovascular revascularization for chronic
mesenteric ischemia: report of a case and review of literatures
Version: 2Date:25 April 2013
Reviewer: Slobodan Tanaskovic
Reviewer's report:
Major Compulsory Revisions
This manuscript describes serious complications following SMA angioplasty for
intestinal ischemia. There are several major drawbacks of this case.
1) As mentioned in the manuscript, bowel ischemia after visceral arteries
angioplasty has been previously described and this case has no remarkable
exceptions.
2) This patient already had distal ileum and ascending colon ischemia prior to
intervention and this fact significantly contributed to unfavorable outcome.
3) In addition to bowel ischemia this patient had postoperative myocardial
infarction and liver abscess that were the main reasons for lethal outcome. The
authors responded immediately after angioplasty and bowel resection was
performed on the second day. If no myocardial infarction or liver abscess
occurred this patient might have survived.
4) The authors should should comment why they didn't use embolic protection
bearing in mind previously described embolic complications?
5) The authors should comment on stent use in SMA angioplasty? How does it
differ from angioplasty alone in the terms of distal embolization?
Minor Essential Revisions
English should be improved.
References are incorrectly written. In almost all of them ";" should be placed
instead od "," after the name of the Journal and the year of publication.
Figures should be improved.
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
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 have no financial or non-financial competing interests.
assistant