Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Utilization of a new technology of 3D biliary CT for ERCP -related procedures: a case 
report  
 
Version: 0 Date: 30 Mar 20 20 
 
Reviewer: Eisuke Iwasaki  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to review this manuscript. This study was 
interesting to show the usefulness of 3D biliary CT for ERCP related procedure. It may be useful 
for endoscopist. Now, there are a few qu estions, and the following comments should be 
addressed.  
 
1) I think there is no problem with clinical course and stenting method.  
 
2) According to Vincent's 3D and 2D images, the area painted green color is seemed to be 
thicker than the bile duct. I am worried that the detailed lesion of the bile duct may not be 
displayed correctly.  
 
3) Please mention the cost and time to do this imag e analysis. According to author contributions, 
5 doctors are involved in 3D creation. Was it such a difficult task?  
 
4) We perform endoscopic drainage without any problems by carefully evaluating 2D CT and 
MRI without the need for preoperative 3D images. O n the other hand, using 3D images as a 
reference during surgery is very innovative. What do you think?  
 
Minor comment  
 
1) Page  7 line 4 -5 The sentence is incomplete and meaningless.  
 
2) Page9 Ethics committee approval is generally not required for case repo rts. If you have 
permission from the Ethics Committee, please provide your approval number.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is req uired in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects req uire further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of co mpeting interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financial ly from the publication of this 
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat may in any way gain or lose 
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
5. Do you have any other financia l competing interests?  
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have  no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details be low. 
 
None  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted f or publication, my na med report 
including a ny attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any com ments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be in cluded as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Utilization of a new technology of 3D biliary CT for ERCP -related procedures: a case 
report  
 
Version: 0 Date: 30 Mar 20 20 
 
Reviewer: Eisuke Iwasaki  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to review this manuscript. This study was 
interesting to show the usefulness of 3D biliary CT for ERCP related procedure. It may be useful 
for endoscopist. Now, there are a few qu estions, and the following comments should be 
addressed.  
 
1) I think there is no problem with clinical course and stenting method.  
 
2) According to Vincent's 3D and 2D images, the area painted green color is seemed to be 
thicker than the bile duct. I am worried that the detailed lesion of the bile duct may not be 
displayed correctly.  
 
3) Please mention the cost and time to do this imag e analysis. According to author contributions, 
5 doctors are involved in 3D creation. Was it such a difficult task?  
 
4) We perform endoscopic drainage without any problems by carefully evaluating 2D CT and 
MRI without the need for preoperative 3D images. O n the other hand, using 3D images as a 
reference during surgery is very innovative. What do you think?  
 
Minor comment  
 
1) Page  7 line 4 -5 The sentence is incomplete and meaningless.  
 
2) Page9 Ethics committee approval is generally not required for case repo rts. If you have 
permission from the Ethics Committee, please provide your approval number.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is req uired in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects req uire further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of co mpeting interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financial ly from the publication of this 
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat may in any way gain or lose 
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
5. Do you have any other financia l competing interests?  
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have  no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details be low. 
 
None  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted f or publication, my na med report 
including a ny attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any com ments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be in cluded as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Utilization of a new technology of 3D biliary CT for ERCP -related procedures: a case 
report  
 
Version: 0 Date: 30 Mar 20 20 
 
Reviewer: Eisuke Iwasaki  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to review this manuscript. This study was 
interesting to show the usefulness of 3D biliary CT for ERCP related procedure. It may be useful 
for endoscopist. Now, there are a few qu estions, and the following comments should be 
addressed.  
 
1) I think there is no problem with clinical course and stenting method.  
 
2) According to Vincent's 3D and 2D images, the area painted green color is seemed to be 
thicker than the bile duct. I am worried that the detailed lesion of the bile duct may not be 
displayed correctly.  
 
3) Please mention the cost and time to do this imag e analysis. According to author contributions, 
5 doctors are involved in 3D creation. Was it such a difficult task?  
 
4) We perform endoscopic drainage without any problems by carefully evaluating 2D CT and 
MRI without the need for preoperative 3D images. O n the other hand, using 3D images as a 
reference during surgery is very innovative. What do you think?  
 
Minor comment  
 
1) Page  7 line 4 -5 The sentence is incomplete and meaningless.  
 
2) Page9 Ethics committee approval is generally not required for case repo rts. If you have 
permission from the Ethics Committee, please provide your approval number.  
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is req uired in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manus cript or would you recommend an 
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects req uire further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Needs some language corrections before being published  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of co mpeting interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, f ees, funding, or salary from an 
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financial ly from the publication of this 
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation t hat may in any way gain or lose 
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents  relating to the content of the 
manuscript?  
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds or has applied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
5. Do you have any other financia l competing interests?  
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
 
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have  no competing interests' 
below. If your reply is yes to any, please give details be low. 
 
None  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understan d that my name will be included 
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted f or publication, my na med report 
including a ny attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors' 
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under an Open Access Creative Commons 
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any com ments 
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be in cluded as confidential comments 
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
assistant