Title: Whether preoperative biliary drainage leads to better patient outcomes of
pancreaticoduodenectomy: A meta-analysis and systematic review
Version: 1 Date: 11 Dec 2024
Reviewer:  Andrej Nikov
Reviewer's report:
From the methodology of the literature review, it is neither clear nor reproducible on what basis
924 studies were excluded based on their title and/or abstract. During my search of the PubMed
and Web of Science databases, I found over 10 retrospective studies that met the inclusion
criteria but were not included in the meta-analysis. Additionally, the meta-analysis did not
include the randomized controlled trial by van der Gaag, published in NEJM in 2010, which is
considered a fundamental piece of evidence demonstrating the inferiority of preoperative biliary
drainage and falls within the timeframe analyzed by the meta-analysis.
Due to the apparently incomplete review of the published literature available in the selected
databases, the conducted meta-analysis cannot be deemed interpretable. These shortcomings
cannot be addressed through any revisions, and I recommend the manuscript to be rejected.
Title: Whether preoperative biliary drainage leads to better patient outcomes of
pancreaticoduodenectomy: A meta-analysis and systematic review
Version: 1 Date: 11 Dec 2024
Reviewer:  Andrej Nikov
Reviewer's report:
From the methodology of the literature review, it is neither clear nor reproducible on what basis
924 studies were excluded based on their title and/or abstract. During my search of the PubMed
and Web of Science databases, I found over 10 retrospective studies that met the inclusion
criteria but were not included in the meta-analysis. Additionally, the meta-analysis did not
include the randomized controlled trial by van der Gaag, published in NEJM in 2010, which is
considered a fundamental piece of evidence demonstrating the inferiority of preoperative biliary
drainage and falls within the timeframe analyzed by the meta-analysis.
Due to the apparently incomplete review of the published literature available in the selected
databases, the conducted meta-analysis cannot be deemed interpretable. These shortcomings
cannot be addressed through any revisions, and I recommend the manuscript to be rejected.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Whether preoperative biliary drainage leads to better patient outcomes of
pancreaticoduodenectomy: A meta-analysis and systematic review
Version: 1 Date: 11 Dec 2024
Reviewer:  Andrej Nikov
Reviewer's report:
From the methodology of the literature review, it is neither clear nor reproducible on what basis
924 studies were excluded based on their title and/or abstract. During my search of the PubMed
and Web of Science databases, I found over 10 retrospective studies that met the inclusion
criteria but were not included in the meta-analysis. Additionally, the meta-analysis did not
include the randomized controlled trial by van der Gaag, published in NEJM in 2010, which is
considered a fundamental piece of evidence demonstrating the inferiority of preoperative biliary
drainage and falls within the timeframe analyzed by the meta-analysis.
Due to the apparently incomplete review of the published literature available in the selected
databases, the conducted meta-analysis cannot be deemed interpretable. These shortcomings
cannot be addressed through any revisions, and I recommend the manuscript to be rejected.
assistant