Reviewer's report
Title:Usefulness and safety of 0.4 percent sodium hyaluronate solution as a
submucosal fluid cushion for endoscopic resection of colorectal mucosal
neoplasms: A prospective multi-center open-label trial
Version: 1Date:7 May 2008
Reviewer: Todd Baron
Reviewer's report:
1. Why were drugs contraindicated in the treatment of peptic ulcer prohibited?
2. Most of the polyps were small and one could have removed without injection.
3. The usefulness rate is arbitrary, subjective, and has not been validated.
4. Steepness is also subjective.
5. This is a single-arm, non-blinded study.
6. I don’t see how the sample size calculation was of any benefit. The numbers
are not large enough to show a difference – at best would be an equivalency to
data published on saline.
7. The types of EMR differed amongst endoscopists making it difficult to tell what
the true benefit of the HS is.
8. Adverse events occurred in almost half the patients.
9. Healing at 8 weeks would be expected regardless of whether HS was used or
not.
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
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 declare that I have no competing interests
Reviewer's report
Title:Usefulness and safety of 0.4 percent sodium hyaluronate solution as a
submucosal fluid cushion for endoscopic resection of colorectal mucosal
neoplasms: A prospective multi-center open-label trial
Version: 1Date:7 May 2008
Reviewer: Todd Baron
Reviewer's report:
1. Why were drugs contraindicated in the treatment of peptic ulcer prohibited?
2. Most of the polyps were small and one could have removed without injection.
3. The usefulness rate is arbitrary, subjective, and has not been validated.
4. Steepness is also subjective.
5. This is a single-arm, non-blinded study.
6. I don’t see how the sample size calculation was of any benefit. The numbers
are not large enough to show a difference – at best would be an equivalency to
data published on saline.
7. The types of EMR differed amongst endoscopists making it difficult to tell what
the true benefit of the HS is.
8. Adverse events occurred in almost half the patients.
9. Healing at 8 weeks would be expected regardless of whether HS was used or
not.
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
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 declare that I have no competing interests
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Usefulness and safety of 0.4 percent sodium hyaluronate solution as a
submucosal fluid cushion for endoscopic resection of colorectal mucosal
neoplasms: A prospective multi-center open-label trial
Version: 1Date:7 May 2008
Reviewer: Todd Baron
Reviewer's report:
1. Why were drugs contraindicated in the treatment of peptic ulcer prohibited?
2. Most of the polyps were small and one could have removed without injection.
3. The usefulness rate is arbitrary, subjective, and has not been validated.
4. Steepness is also subjective.
5. This is a single-arm, non-blinded study.
6. I don’t see how the sample size calculation was of any benefit. The numbers
are not large enough to show a difference – at best would be an equivalency to
data published on saline.
7. The types of EMR differed amongst endoscopists making it difficult to tell what
the true benefit of the HS is.
8. Adverse events occurred in almost half the patients.
9. Healing at 8 weeks would be expected regardless of whether HS was used or
not.
Level of interest: An article of insufficient interest to warrant publication in a
scientific/medical journal
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 declare that I have no competing interests
assistant