Title: Transradial versus Transfemoral Approach for TACE: A Retrospective Study
Version: 1 Date: 17 Oct 2022
Reviewer:  Yangxun Pan
Reviewer's report:
Dr. Guo and colleagues presented an impressive comparison between the transradial and
transfemoral methods when conducting transarterial chemoembolization from retrospective
perspectives. The results indicated that transradial access was an effective and feasible
alternative to transfemoral access for TACE. However, I have several concerns and if the author
could address them, I would be glad to endorse this study for publishment.
Since the current study is likely technical research that discusses the methods of catheterizations,
the observative outcomes seem to be not appropriate if the author used the tumor response.
Additionally, in the inclusions of the methods section, hepatic malignancies were included in
this study, and it is generally known that different pathological types of tumors respond to the
treatment dramatically differently, which also indicated that the tumor response was unable to
be used as an evaluation in this study. I would highly recommend the author use other evaluative
criteria to measure the technical outcomes.
To further discuss the technical feasibilities between transradial and transfemoral methods, the
author needs to provide representative pictures under DSA, in order to answer the question of
whether both methods are able to catheter to similar levels of hepatic arterials, like second-level
right/left hepatic arterials. Accordingly, information on tumor locations in both groups should
also be provided in the baseline to guarantee comparability.
Finally, someone who is a native speaker needs to assist with the grammar throughout the
manuscript.
Title: Transradial versus Transfemoral Approach for TACE: A Retrospective Study
Version: 1 Date: 17 Oct 2022
Reviewer:  Yangxun Pan
Reviewer's report:
Dr. Guo and colleagues presented an impressive comparison between the transradial and
transfemoral methods when conducting transarterial chemoembolization from retrospective
perspectives. The results indicated that transradial access was an effective and feasible
alternative to transfemoral access for TACE. However, I have several concerns and if the author
could address them, I would be glad to endorse this study for publishment.
Since the current study is likely technical research that discusses the methods of catheterizations,
the observative outcomes seem to be not appropriate if the author used the tumor response.
Additionally, in the inclusions of the methods section, hepatic malignancies were included in
this study, and it is generally known that different pathological types of tumors respond to the
treatment dramatically differently, which also indicated that the tumor response was unable to
be used as an evaluation in this study. I would highly recommend the author use other evaluative
criteria to measure the technical outcomes.
To further discuss the technical feasibilities between transradial and transfemoral methods, the
author needs to provide representative pictures under DSA, in order to answer the question of
whether both methods are able to catheter to similar levels of hepatic arterials, like second-level
right/left hepatic arterials. Accordingly, information on tumor locations in both groups should
also be provided in the baseline to guarantee comparability.
Finally, someone who is a native speaker needs to assist with the grammar throughout the
manuscript.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Transradial versus Transfemoral Approach for TACE: A Retrospective Study
Version: 1 Date: 17 Oct 2022
Reviewer:  Yangxun Pan
Reviewer's report:
Dr. Guo and colleagues presented an impressive comparison between the transradial and
transfemoral methods when conducting transarterial chemoembolization from retrospective
perspectives. The results indicated that transradial access was an effective and feasible
alternative to transfemoral access for TACE. However, I have several concerns and if the author
could address them, I would be glad to endorse this study for publishment.
Since the current study is likely technical research that discusses the methods of catheterizations,
the observative outcomes seem to be not appropriate if the author used the tumor response.
Additionally, in the inclusions of the methods section, hepatic malignancies were included in
this study, and it is generally known that different pathological types of tumors respond to the
treatment dramatically differently, which also indicated that the tumor response was unable to
be used as an evaluation in this study. I would highly recommend the author use other evaluative
criteria to measure the technical outcomes.
To further discuss the technical feasibilities between transradial and transfemoral methods, the
author needs to provide representative pictures under DSA, in order to answer the question of
whether both methods are able to catheter to similar levels of hepatic arterials, like second-level
right/left hepatic arterials. Accordingly, information on tumor locations in both groups should
also be provided in the baseline to guarantee comparability.
Finally, someone who is a native speaker needs to assist with the grammar throughout the
manuscript.
assistant