Reviewer's report
Title:Outcomes and factors influencing survival in cirrhotic cases with
spontaneous rupture of hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter study
Version: 3Date:5 April 2009
Reviewer: Sven Wallerstedt
Reviewer's report:
I think that the authors have made a good revision of the manuscript, and I find
that they have responded to my criticism. The most important correction is the
change of the inclusion criteria for patients into group ConT by use of defined
exclusion criteria with the result that the two groups now are fairly similar.
However, I have two minor comments, of which one is a consequence of this
change and thus necessary to handle.
1. After reducing the ConT group from 38 to 32 persons the authors present a lot
of data from this new group. This is also done considering cause of death in
Results, last para. However, the authors have forgotten to change the figures in
Table 6, which must be done. I also think that it will be easier to understand the
table if the legend is completed with the following text: “In one of the 16 TAE
patients it was not possible to stop the hemorrhage by use of TAE”.
2. The authors have accepted my recommendation to insert “cirrhotic” at several
places in the text, which I think should be done also in the first sentence in
Methods between “48” and “patients”.
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:Outcomes and factors influencing survival in cirrhotic cases with
spontaneous rupture of hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter study
Version: 3Date:5 April 2009
Reviewer: Sven Wallerstedt
Reviewer's report:
I think that the authors have made a good revision of the manuscript, and I find
that they have responded to my criticism. The most important correction is the
change of the inclusion criteria for patients into group ConT by use of defined
exclusion criteria with the result that the two groups now are fairly similar.
However, I have two minor comments, of which one is a consequence of this
change and thus necessary to handle.
1. After reducing the ConT group from 38 to 32 persons the authors present a lot
of data from this new group. This is also done considering cause of death in
Results, last para. However, the authors have forgotten to change the figures in
Table 6, which must be done. I also think that it will be easier to understand the
table if the legend is completed with the following text: “In one of the 16 TAE
patients it was not possible to stop the hemorrhage by use of TAE”.
2. The authors have accepted my recommendation to insert “cirrhotic” at several
places in the text, which I think should be done also in the first sentence in
Methods between “48” and “patients”.
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:Outcomes and factors influencing survival in cirrhotic cases with
spontaneous rupture of hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter study
Version: 3Date:5 April 2009
Reviewer: Sven Wallerstedt
Reviewer's report:
I think that the authors have made a good revision of the manuscript, and I find
that they have responded to my criticism. The most important correction is the
change of the inclusion criteria for patients into group ConT by use of defined
exclusion criteria with the result that the two groups now are fairly similar.
However, I have two minor comments, of which one is a consequence of this
change and thus necessary to handle.
1. After reducing the ConT group from 38 to 32 persons the authors present a lot
of data from this new group. This is also done considering cause of death in
Results, last para. However, the authors have forgotten to change the figures in
Table 6, which must be done. I also think that it will be easier to understand the
table if the legend is completed with the following text: “In one of the 16 TAE
patients it was not possible to stop the hemorrhage by use of TAE”.
2. The authors have accepted my recommendation to insert “cirrhotic” at several
places in the text, which I think should be done also in the first sentence in
Methods between “48” and “patients”.
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