Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: Clinical practice of basin -shaped hepaticojejunostomy following hilar resection of stage 
III/IV hilar cholangiocarcinoma  
 
Version: 0 Date: 11 Apr 2018  
 
Reviewer: Alexis Laurent  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Clinical  practice  of  basin -shaped hepaticojejunostomy  following  hilar  resection  of stage IV 
hilar cholangiocarcinoma  
I read with great interest the article entitled Clinical  practice  of  basin -shaped 
hepaticojejunostomy  following  hilar  resecti on  of stage IV hilar cholangiocarcinoma  
The aim  of  this  study was to determine, in patients suffering from stage IV hilar 
holangiocarcinoma , safety and effects of  basin -shaped  biliary -enteric  anastomosis  after  
segment  IV/extended IV   
 
I have several comments  
Major comments:  
1. Are all patients really type IV. Indeed, if the described technique, is to pediculize the 
biliary ducs, after section, on 5 mm and knowing that the section has been carried out 
already at 5 mm of tumor, because all pati ents are R0, there should be few patients with 4 
bile stumps and in addition anastomoses are carried out on 1 to 2 mm stumps. therefore, 
there are some examples of MRI in the manuscript.  
 
2. How was defined the R0 character of the resection: whether or not perineural invasion 
was integrated into the margin, or was it only with reference to that of the biliary margin ? 
 
3. Can the authors describe the management they have had of the arterial vascularization of 
the remnant bile ducts. Indeed, by definition, a b ile ducts cross section at this location 
leads to arterial devascularization. this point is probably the most important moment of 
this study.  
 
4. What was the mean foolow -up 
 
5. We need a survival curves (DFS and OS)  
Minor comments:  
6. Segment IV/extended IV , does it mean to the segment I ? => autors need to use the 
Brisbane classification for hepatectomy and by the way clavien classification for 
complication.  
 
7. Can the authors describe more precisely the type of recurrence.  
 
8. How many patients had different surgical management during the same period for the 
same type of lesion.  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are requi red 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 manuscrip t or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written Englis h 
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration 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 this  
manuscript, 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  
finan cially 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 organ ization 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 tha t I have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name wi ll be included  
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including 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 Commons  
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included 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: Clinical practice of basin -shaped hepaticojejunostomy following hilar resection of stage 
III/IV hilar cholangiocarcinoma  
 
Version: 0 Date: 11 Apr 2018  
 
Reviewer: Alexis Laurent  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Clinical  practice  of  basin -shaped hepaticojejunostomy  following  hilar  resection  of stage IV 
hilar cholangiocarcinoma  
I read with great interest the article entitled Clinical  practice  of  basin -shaped 
hepaticojejunostomy  following  hilar  resecti on  of stage IV hilar cholangiocarcinoma  
The aim  of  this  study was to determine, in patients suffering from stage IV hilar 
holangiocarcinoma , safety and effects of  basin -shaped  biliary -enteric  anastomosis  after  
segment  IV/extended IV   
 
I have several comments  
Major comments:  
1. Are all patients really type IV. Indeed, if the described technique, is to pediculize the 
biliary ducs, after section, on 5 mm and knowing that the section has been carried out 
already at 5 mm of tumor, because all pati ents are R0, there should be few patients with 4 
bile stumps and in addition anastomoses are carried out on 1 to 2 mm stumps. therefore, 
there are some examples of MRI in the manuscript.  
 
2. How was defined the R0 character of the resection: whether or not perineural invasion 
was integrated into the margin, or was it only with reference to that of the biliary margin ? 
 
3. Can the authors describe the management they have had of the arterial vascularization of 
the remnant bile ducts. Indeed, by definition, a b ile ducts cross section at this location 
leads to arterial devascularization. this point is probably the most important moment of 
this study.  
 
4. What was the mean foolow -up 
 
5. We need a survival curves (DFS and OS)  
Minor comments:  
6. Segment IV/extended IV , does it mean to the segment I ? => autors need to use the 
Brisbane classification for hepatectomy and by the way clavien classification for 
complication.  
 
7. Can the authors describe more precisely the type of recurrence.  
 
8. How many patients had different surgical management during the same period for the 
same type of lesion.  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are requi red 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 manuscrip t or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written Englis h 
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration 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 this  
manuscript, 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  
finan cially 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 organ ization 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 tha t I have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name wi ll be included  
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including 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 Commons  
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included 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: Clinical practice of basin -shaped hepaticojejunostomy following hilar resection of stage 
III/IV hilar cholangiocarcinoma  
 
Version: 0 Date: 11 Apr 2018  
 
Reviewer: Alexis Laurent  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
Clinical  practice  of  basin -shaped hepaticojejunostomy  following  hilar  resection  of stage IV 
hilar cholangiocarcinoma  
I read with great interest the article entitled Clinical  practice  of  basin -shaped 
hepaticojejunostomy  following  hilar  resecti on  of stage IV hilar cholangiocarcinoma  
The aim  of  this  study was to determine, in patients suffering from stage IV hilar 
holangiocarcinoma , safety and effects of  basin -shaped  biliary -enteric  anastomosis  after  
segment  IV/extended IV   
 
I have several comments  
Major comments:  
1. Are all patients really type IV. Indeed, if the described technique, is to pediculize the 
biliary ducs, after section, on 5 mm and knowing that the section has been carried out 
already at 5 mm of tumor, because all pati ents are R0, there should be few patients with 4 
bile stumps and in addition anastomoses are carried out on 1 to 2 mm stumps. therefore, 
there are some examples of MRI in the manuscript.  
 
2. How was defined the R0 character of the resection: whether or not perineural invasion 
was integrated into the margin, or was it only with reference to that of the biliary margin ? 
 
3. Can the authors describe the management they have had of the arterial vascularization of 
the remnant bile ducts. Indeed, by definition, a b ile ducts cross section at this location 
leads to arterial devascularization. this point is probably the most important moment of 
this study.  
 
4. What was the mean foolow -up 
 
5. We need a survival curves (DFS and OS)  
Minor comments:  
6. Segment IV/extended IV , does it mean to the segment I ? => autors need to use the 
Brisbane classification for hepatectomy and by the way clavien classification for 
complication.  
 
7. Can the authors describe more precisely the type of recurrence.  
 
8. How many patients had different surgical management during the same period for the 
same type of lesion.  
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
No 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are requi red 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 manuscrip t or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please specify what aspects require further  
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
I am able to assess the statistics  
 
Quality of written Englis h 
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration 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 this  
manuscript, 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  
finan cially 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 organ ization 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 tha t I have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name wi ll be included  
on my report to the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including 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 Commons  
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as  confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal  
assistant