Reviewer’ s report
Title: Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Hepatectomy of Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Case
Report and Literature Review
Version: 0Date: 05 Apr 2020
Reviewer: Antonio Calvo
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors.
First of all, I show you my admiration for the article. Still, I have some doubts that I would likeyou to solve for me.
1.- Title: Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Hepatectomy of Recurrent Liver Tumors, Case Report and
Literature ReviewIt would not be more advisable to refer the title to hepatocellular carcinoma and not to livertumors. Consider this possibility as it is a clinical case, not a series of cases
2.- Recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma
Authors present a patient with a recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma without knowing theirfunctional state of the liver well, although they say that this case is a recurrent hepatocellularcarcinoma with severe cirrhosisAs we know, gold standard therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with underlying liverdisease is orthotopic liver transplantation. It would be advisable for the authors to justify if thispossibility had been considered in the evolution of the disease
3.- Surgical Information
Is it a pure retroperitoneal approach without adding additional abdominal ports, or a posteriorapproach to laparoscopic resection of segment 7? In figure 2, an image of the cavity can beobserved with a transperitoneal instrument
4- Discussion
Perhaps it describes the laparoscopic surgery a lot in the manuscript when the fundamentalobjective of the case is the retroperitoneal approach to the tumor.
5.- Pathology
The histological image does not show all the diagnostic details described. It would be desirable toinclude a fewer artefacts image, where the cellular features and the pattern that would guide thediagnosis issued were clearly defined.What technique have they performed, because it does not have the usual appearance of aHematoxylin-eosin H-E?Could you provide any other pathological images that show the details more clearly?
6.- Reference
There may be too many bibliographic citations for a clinical case. With so many, it may be
advisable not to repeat them.
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required 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.
Unable to assessAre the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.
YesAre you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an
additional statistical review?If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require furtherassessment in your comments to the editors.
Not relevant to this manuscriptQuality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Needs some language corrections before being publishedDeclaration of competing interests
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of thismanuscript, either now or in the future?
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that 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 financial 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 below.
I declare that I have no competing interests´below
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named reportincluding any 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 CommonsCC-BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). I understand that any commentswhich I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential commentsto the editors, which will not be published.
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal
Reviewer’ s report
Title: Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Hepatectomy of Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Case
Report and Literature Review
Version: 0Date: 05 Apr 2020
Reviewer: Antonio Calvo
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors.
First of all, I show you my admiration for the article. Still, I have some doubts that I would likeyou to solve for me.
1.- Title: Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Hepatectomy of Recurrent Liver Tumors, Case Report and
Literature ReviewIt would not be more advisable to refer the title to hepatocellular carcinoma and not to livertumors. Consider this possibility as it is a clinical case, not a series of cases
2.- Recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma
Authors present a patient with a recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma without knowing theirfunctional state of the liver well, although they say that this case is a recurrent hepatocellularcarcinoma with severe cirrhosisAs we know, gold standard therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with underlying liverdisease is orthotopic liver transplantation. It would be advisable for the authors to justify if thispossibility had been considered in the evolution of the disease
3.- Surgical Information
Is it a pure retroperitoneal approach without adding additional abdominal ports, or a posteriorapproach to laparoscopic resection of segment 7? In figure 2, an image of the cavity can beobserved with a transperitoneal instrument
4- Discussion
Perhaps it describes the laparoscopic surgery a lot in the manuscript when the fundamentalobjective of the case is the retroperitoneal approach to the tumor.
5.- Pathology
The histological image does not show all the diagnostic details described. It would be desirable toinclude a fewer artefacts image, where the cellular features and the pattern that would guide thediagnosis issued were clearly defined.What technique have they performed, because it does not have the usual appearance of aHematoxylin-eosin H-E?Could you provide any other pathological images that show the details more clearly?
6.- Reference
There may be too many bibliographic citations for a clinical case. With so many, it may be
advisable not to repeat them.
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required 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.
Unable to assessAre the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.
YesAre you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an
additional statistical review?If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require furtherassessment in your comments to the editors.
Not relevant to this manuscriptQuality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Needs some language corrections before being publishedDeclaration of competing interests
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of thismanuscript, either now or in the future?
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that 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 financial 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 below.
I declare that I have no competing interests´below
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named reportincluding any 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 CommonsCC-BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). I understand that any commentswhich I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential commentsto 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: Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Hepatectomy of Recurrent Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Case
Report and Literature Review
Version: 0Date: 05 Apr 2020
Reviewer: Antonio Calvo
Reviewer's report:
Dear authors.
First of all, I show you my admiration for the article. Still, I have some doubts that I would likeyou to solve for me.
1.- Title: Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Hepatectomy of Recurrent Liver Tumors, Case Report and
Literature ReviewIt would not be more advisable to refer the title to hepatocellular carcinoma and not to livertumors. Consider this possibility as it is a clinical case, not a series of cases
2.- Recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma
Authors present a patient with a recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma without knowing theirfunctional state of the liver well, although they say that this case is a recurrent hepatocellularcarcinoma with severe cirrhosisAs we know, gold standard therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with underlying liverdisease is orthotopic liver transplantation. It would be advisable for the authors to justify if thispossibility had been considered in the evolution of the disease
3.- Surgical Information
Is it a pure retroperitoneal approach without adding additional abdominal ports, or a posteriorapproach to laparoscopic resection of segment 7? In figure 2, an image of the cavity can beobserved with a transperitoneal instrument
4- Discussion
Perhaps it describes the laparoscopic surgery a lot in the manuscript when the fundamentalobjective of the case is the retroperitoneal approach to the tumor.
5.- Pathology
The histological image does not show all the diagnostic details described. It would be desirable toinclude a fewer artefacts image, where the cellular features and the pattern that would guide thediagnosis issued were clearly defined.What technique have they performed, because it does not have the usual appearance of aHematoxylin-eosin H-E?Could you provide any other pathological images that show the details more clearly?
6.- Reference
There may be too many bibliographic citations for a clinical case. With so many, it may be
advisable not to repeat them.
Are the methods appropriate and well described?
If not, please specify what is required 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.
Unable to assessAre the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.
YesAre you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an
additional statistical review?If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require furtherassessment in your comments to the editors.
Not relevant to this manuscriptQuality of written English
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:
Needs some language corrections before being publishedDeclaration of competing interests
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of thismanuscript, either now or in the future?
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that 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 financial 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 below.
I declare that I have no competing interests´below
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named reportincluding any 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 CommonsCC-BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). I understand that any commentswhich I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as confidential commentsto the editors, which will not be published.
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal
assistant