Title: Biopsy in emergency gastroscopy does not increase the risk of rebleeding in patients with
Forrest I acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding combined with suspected malignant
gastric ulcer: a multicenter retrospective cohort study
Version: 3 Date: 27 Feb 2021
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript described the usefulness of biopsies during EG in patients with Forrest I
ANUGIB combined with SMGU using a propensity-matched approach, and demonstrated
that there were no significant differences in the risk of rebleeding in patients with Forrest I
ANVUGIB combined with SMGU during EG between biopsy and no-biopsy groups. This paper
is an interesting work. My comments were as follows:
1. I agree the result that there were no significant differences in the risk of rebleeding in patients
with Forrest I ANVUGIB combined with SMGU during EG between biopsy and no-biopsy
groups in clinical practice. However, the authors should add the data about the endoscopic
hemostatic therapy during emergency endoscopy in Table 1 because it might be associated with
rebleeding.
2. Rebleeding was defined when a significant drop in hemoglobin was observed. How much
hemoglobin decrease does a significant drop mean?
3. About Figure 2.
I think “30-day survival” should be changed to “30-day survival without rebleeding” or
“rebleeding-free 30-day survival”.
4. RWS and EVB should be excluded from abbreviation lists because they were written only
once in the text.
5. There is mistake in percentage of patients who underwent biopsy in Figure 1.
Wrong 401 (39.0%)   Correct 401 (39.7%)
Title: Biopsy in emergency gastroscopy does not increase the risk of rebleeding in patients with
Forrest I acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding combined with suspected malignant
gastric ulcer: a multicenter retrospective cohort study
Version: 3 Date: 27 Feb 2021
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript described the usefulness of biopsies during EG in patients with Forrest I
ANUGIB combined with SMGU using a propensity-matched approach, and demonstrated
that there were no significant differences in the risk of rebleeding in patients with Forrest I
ANVUGIB combined with SMGU during EG between biopsy and no-biopsy groups. This paper
is an interesting work. My comments were as follows:
1. I agree the result that there were no significant differences in the risk of rebleeding in patients
with Forrest I ANVUGIB combined with SMGU during EG between biopsy and no-biopsy
groups in clinical practice. However, the authors should add the data about the endoscopic
hemostatic therapy during emergency endoscopy in Table 1 because it might be associated with
rebleeding.
2. Rebleeding was defined when a significant drop in hemoglobin was observed. How much
hemoglobin decrease does a significant drop mean?
3. About Figure 2.
I think “30-day survival” should be changed to “30-day survival without rebleeding” or
“rebleeding-free 30-day survival”.
4. RWS and EVB should be excluded from abbreviation lists because they were written only
once in the text.
5. There is mistake in percentage of patients who underwent biopsy in Figure 1.
Wrong 401 (39.0%)   Correct 401 (39.7%)
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Biopsy in emergency gastroscopy does not increase the risk of rebleeding in patients with
Forrest I acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding combined with suspected malignant
gastric ulcer: a multicenter retrospective cohort study
Version: 3 Date: 27 Feb 2021
Reviewer's report:
This manuscript described the usefulness of biopsies during EG in patients with Forrest I
ANUGIB combined with SMGU using a propensity-matched approach, and demonstrated
that there were no significant differences in the risk of rebleeding in patients with Forrest I
ANVUGIB combined with SMGU during EG between biopsy and no-biopsy groups. This paper
is an interesting work. My comments were as follows:
1. I agree the result that there were no significant differences in the risk of rebleeding in patients
with Forrest I ANVUGIB combined with SMGU during EG between biopsy and no-biopsy
groups in clinical practice. However, the authors should add the data about the endoscopic
hemostatic therapy during emergency endoscopy in Table 1 because it might be associated with
rebleeding.
2. Rebleeding was defined when a significant drop in hemoglobin was observed. How much
hemoglobin decrease does a significant drop mean?
3. About Figure 2.
I think “30-day survival” should be changed to “30-day survival without rebleeding” or
“rebleeding-free 30-day survival”.
4. RWS and EVB should be excluded from abbreviation lists because they were written only
once in the text.
5. There is mistake in percentage of patients who underwent biopsy in Figure 1.
Wrong 401 (39.0%)   Correct 401 (39.7%)
assistant