Reviewer’ s report
Title: Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm complicated with intraductal bleeding in a young
woman mimicked a cystic solid pseudo-papillary tumor: a case report.
Version: 0Date: 18 May 2020
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
RELEVANCE - Does this case report make a contribution to medical knowledge, have
educational value, or highlight the need for a change in clinical practice or diagnostic/prognosticapproaches?Yes, this report contributes to medical knowledge
CASE DESCRIPTION - Are the details of the case sufficiently well described to understand the
patient's symptoms and course of treatment?No - there are minor issues
DIAGNOSIS/INTERPRETATION - Based on the facts presented, are the diagnosis, interpretation,
and course of treatment medically sound?Yes, the work described is medically sound
DISCUSSION OF THE CASE - Does the discussion appropriately analyse the importance of the
findings and their relevance to future understanding of disease processes, diagnosis or treatment?Has an adequate literature review pertinent to the case been included?
No - there are minor issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Could an appropriately REVISED version of this
work represent a technically sound contribution?Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:GENERAL COMMENTS: Overall, the case report is interesting, informative, and novel. It has the
potential to become a valuable addition to the literature.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
- Typically, titles should not contain abbreviations, unless absolutely essential. Please omit theIPMN abbreviation from the title.- The authors mentioned the rarity of the investigated condition in English literature. How aboutother bodies of literature. For example, Japanese literature?- Please provide data on patient's BMI and waist circumference.- Given that the patient had gallstones, please report on history of biliary colics and acute
pancreatitis.
- The MR scanner was merely a 1.5T. Do the authors believe the use of a 3T scanner would have
helped to establish the correct diagnosis earlier?- Please describe in detail what surgery was performed and its timing since initial presentation.Also discuss why the patient developed pancreatic fistula.
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 required in your comments to the authors.
YesAre 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 manuscript
Quality 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.
This reviewer has been recruited by a partner organization, Research Square. Reviewers with
declared or apparent competing interests are not utilized for these reviews. This reviewer hasagreed to publication of their comments online under a Creative Commons Attribution Licenseattributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for completing the review within aspecified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of the reviewerrecommendation.
Reviewer Publication Consent. 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) if this manu-script is accepted for publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the publishedreport have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not be published.Ifyou are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the editorial office before completingthe review.If you wish, you can include your name in your published report. Please note you mustdecide whether to include your name at the start of the process and confirm this decision wheneverprompted. If you change your decision later, we will not be able to publish your name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please do not publish my name with my report.
(default)
Reviewer’ s report
Title: Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm complicated with intraductal bleeding in a young
woman mimicked a cystic solid pseudo-papillary tumor: a case report.
Version: 0Date: 18 May 2020
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
RELEVANCE - Does this case report make a contribution to medical knowledge, have
educational value, or highlight the need for a change in clinical practice or diagnostic/prognosticapproaches?Yes, this report contributes to medical knowledge
CASE DESCRIPTION - Are the details of the case sufficiently well described to understand the
patient's symptoms and course of treatment?No - there are minor issues
DIAGNOSIS/INTERPRETATION - Based on the facts presented, are the diagnosis, interpretation,
and course of treatment medically sound?Yes, the work described is medically sound
DISCUSSION OF THE CASE - Does the discussion appropriately analyse the importance of the
findings and their relevance to future understanding of disease processes, diagnosis or treatment?Has an adequate literature review pertinent to the case been included?
No - there are minor issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Could an appropriately REVISED version of this
work represent a technically sound contribution?Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:GENERAL COMMENTS: Overall, the case report is interesting, informative, and novel. It has the
potential to become a valuable addition to the literature.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
- Typically, titles should not contain abbreviations, unless absolutely essential. Please omit theIPMN abbreviation from the title.- The authors mentioned the rarity of the investigated condition in English literature. How aboutother bodies of literature. For example, Japanese literature?- Please provide data on patient's BMI and waist circumference.- Given that the patient had gallstones, please report on history of biliary colics and acute
pancreatitis.
- The MR scanner was merely a 1.5T. Do the authors believe the use of a 3T scanner would have
helped to establish the correct diagnosis earlier?- Please describe in detail what surgery was performed and its timing since initial presentation.Also discuss why the patient developed pancreatic fistula.
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 required in your comments to the authors.
YesAre 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 manuscript
Quality 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.
This reviewer has been recruited by a partner organization, Research Square. Reviewers with
declared or apparent competing interests are not utilized for these reviews. This reviewer hasagreed to publication of their comments online under a Creative Commons Attribution Licenseattributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for completing the review within aspecified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of the reviewerrecommendation.
Reviewer Publication Consent. 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) if this manu-script is accepted for publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the publishedreport have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not be published.Ifyou are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the editorial office before completingthe review.If you wish, you can include your name in your published report. Please note you mustdecide whether to include your name at the start of the process and confirm this decision wheneverprompted. If you change your decision later, we will not be able to publish your name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please do not publish my name with my report.
(default)
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer’ s report
Title: Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm complicated with intraductal bleeding in a young
woman mimicked a cystic solid pseudo-papillary tumor: a case report.
Version: 0Date: 18 May 2020
Reviewer's report:
PEER REVIEWER ASSESSMENTS:
RELEVANCE - Does this case report make a contribution to medical knowledge, have
educational value, or highlight the need for a change in clinical practice or diagnostic/prognosticapproaches?Yes, this report contributes to medical knowledge
CASE DESCRIPTION - Are the details of the case sufficiently well described to understand the
patient's symptoms and course of treatment?No - there are minor issues
DIAGNOSIS/INTERPRETATION - Based on the facts presented, are the diagnosis, interpretation,
and course of treatment medically sound?Yes, the work described is medically sound
DISCUSSION OF THE CASE - Does the discussion appropriately analyse the importance of the
findings and their relevance to future understanding of disease processes, diagnosis or treatment?Has an adequate literature review pertinent to the case been included?
No - there are minor issues
OVERALL MANUSCRIPT POTENTIAL - Could an appropriately REVISED version of this
work represent a technically sound contribution?Probably - with minor revisions
PEER REVIEWER COMMENTS:GENERAL COMMENTS: Overall, the case report is interesting, informative, and novel. It has the
potential to become a valuable addition to the literature.
REQUESTED REVISIONS:
- Typically, titles should not contain abbreviations, unless absolutely essential. Please omit theIPMN abbreviation from the title.- The authors mentioned the rarity of the investigated condition in English literature. How aboutother bodies of literature. For example, Japanese literature?- Please provide data on patient's BMI and waist circumference.- Given that the patient had gallstones, please report on history of biliary colics and acute
pancreatitis.
- The MR scanner was merely a 1.5T. Do the authors believe the use of a 3T scanner would have
helped to establish the correct diagnosis earlier?- Please describe in detail what surgery was performed and its timing since initial presentation.Also discuss why the patient developed pancreatic fistula.
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 required in your comments to the authors.
YesAre 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 manuscript
Quality 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.
This reviewer has been recruited by a partner organization, Research Square. Reviewers with
declared or apparent competing interests are not utilized for these reviews. This reviewer hasagreed to publication of their comments online under a Creative Commons Attribution Licenseattributed to Research Square and was paid a small honorarium for completing the review within aspecified timeframe. Honoraria for reviews such as this are paid regardless of the reviewerrecommendation.
Reviewer Publication Consent. 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) if this manu-script is accepted for publication. Any comments that I do not wish to be included in the publishedreport have been included as confidential comments to the editor, which will not be published.Ifyou are not happy for us to publish this report, please contact the editorial office before completingthe review.If you wish, you can include your name in your published report. Please note you mustdecide whether to include your name at the start of the process and confirm this decision wheneverprompted. If you change your decision later, we will not be able to publish your name.
I agree to the terms of the CC-BY 4.0 license; please do not publish my name with my report.
(default)
assistant