Reviewer's report 
 Implantation of a colorectal stent as a therapeutic approach in the treatment of esophageal leakage - Title: 
a case report 
 1  19 January 2007 Version: Date: 
 Johannes Zacherl Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
Interesting case report, helpful in special situation ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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) 
Abstract background: Anastomotic leaks are usually not followed by a mortality of 60%, especially when 
located cervically; 
Abstract case presentation: what means "...the patient aspirates fluid because the stent was too small..." 
Ther are some contradictory remarks regarding the position of the anastomosis: the tumor was located 
beginning at 23 cm ab oral? (from the incisors?), that whould mean that the esophagus should be resected 
up to the neck (cervical anastomosis), on the other hand the leak drained into the "left" mediastinum and the anastomois has been resected transthoracally (thus, was intrathoracally located??); please give a clear 
description about the localisation of the first and second (after reoperation and resection) anastomosis 
please give a clear description of the time course of interventions, reoperation, stent implantations, starting of oral food intake and discharge I cannot agree that fibrin glue application is the standard treatment of anastomostic leaks 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
use "esophageal remnant" instead of "rest" 
the diameters of the larg polyflex stent are 21mm (body, not 22mm!) and 25mm (flare) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research interests Level of interest: 
 Needs some language corrections before being published Quality of written English: 
 No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician. Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
Reviewer's report 
 Implantation of a colorectal stent as a therapeutic approach in the treatment of esophageal leakage - Title: 
a case report 
 1  19 January 2007 Version: Date: 
 Johannes Zacherl Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
Interesting case report, helpful in special situation ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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) 
Abstract background: Anastomotic leaks are usually not followed by a mortality of 60%, especially when 
located cervically; 
Abstract case presentation: what means "...the patient aspirates fluid because the stent was too small..." 
Ther are some contradictory remarks regarding the position of the anastomosis: the tumor was located 
beginning at 23 cm ab oral? (from the incisors?), that whould mean that the esophagus should be resected 
up to the neck (cervical anastomosis), on the other hand the leak drained into the "left" mediastinum and the anastomois has been resected transthoracally (thus, was intrathoracally located??); please give a clear 
description about the localisation of the first and second (after reoperation and resection) anastomosis 
please give a clear description of the time course of interventions, reoperation, stent implantations, starting of oral food intake and discharge I cannot agree that fibrin glue application is the standard treatment of anastomostic leaks 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
use "esophageal remnant" instead of "rest" 
the diameters of the larg polyflex stent are 21mm (body, not 22mm!) and 25mm (flare) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research interests Level of interest: 
 Needs some language corrections before being published Quality of written English: 
 No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician. Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report 
 Implantation of a colorectal stent as a therapeutic approach in the treatment of esophageal leakage - Title: 
a case report 
 1  19 January 2007 Version: Date: 
 Johannes Zacherl Reviewer: 
Reviewer's report: 
General 
Interesting case report, helpful in special situation ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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) 
Abstract background: Anastomotic leaks are usually not followed by a mortality of 60%, especially when 
located cervically; 
Abstract case presentation: what means "...the patient aspirates fluid because the stent was too small..." 
Ther are some contradictory remarks regarding the position of the anastomosis: the tumor was located 
beginning at 23 cm ab oral? (from the incisors?), that whould mean that the esophagus should be resected 
up to the neck (cervical anastomosis), on the other hand the leak drained into the "left" mediastinum and the anastomois has been resected transthoracally (thus, was intrathoracally located??); please give a clear 
description about the localisation of the first and second (after reoperation and resection) anastomosis 
please give a clear description of the time course of interventions, reoperation, stent implantations, starting of oral food intake and discharge I cannot agree that fibrin glue application is the standard treatment of anastomostic leaks 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Discretionary Revisions (which the author can choose to ignore) 
use "esophageal remnant" instead of "rest" 
the diameters of the larg polyflex stent are 21mm (body, not 22mm!) and 25mm (flare) 
 Accept after minor essential revisions What next?: 
 An article whose findings are important to those with closely related research interests Level of interest: 
 Needs some language corrections before being published Quality of written English: 
 No, the manuscript does not need to be seen by a statistician. Statistical review: 
Declaration of competing interests: 
'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
assistant