Title: Effect of posture on anorectal manometric measurements in female patients with fecal
incontinence and rectoanal intussusception
Version: 6 Date: 20 Oct 2022
Reviewer:  Yoav Mazor
Reviewer's report:
I thank the authors for answering my comments. I do still have some queries regarding the major
comments, as well as some minor points:
Major comments:
1- Regarding IBS diagnosis: No citation is given for which rome version was used. The author
state a very small (3/80) patients answering Rome criteria. Can the authors explain this? How
many patients were diagnosed with chronic constipation of IBS-C according to Rome?
2- Citation for use of anorectal pressure probe is a non-validation study. Please provide
appropriate quotation or state accordingly
3- 'in house' norms are given without any reference. Was this based on healthy volunteers? other
publications? Please state if any or none.
4- Was informed consent written or verbal? Was it required by ethics?
Also:
Was full data for CSS and FISI available for all patients?
Although I agree with reviewer 1 regarding putting the main results into the manuscript body
of text, I do feel the authors have a bit over-shooted this. Currently information in the text is
repeated in the tables. I would recommend leaving only main results in the text and referring
for other info to the tables (page 5).
Typos:
Anal length should be 'shorter' not 'smaller' through-out
FIgure 1 has 'maximal urethral closure pressure' in it. Is this a typo?
Page 4 'not to activate an accidental the external anal sphincter reflex' to correct
Title: Effect of posture on anorectal manometric measurements in female patients with fecal
incontinence and rectoanal intussusception
Version: 6 Date: 20 Oct 2022
Reviewer:  Yoav Mazor
Reviewer's report:
I thank the authors for answering my comments. I do still have some queries regarding the major
comments, as well as some minor points:
Major comments:
1- Regarding IBS diagnosis: No citation is given for which rome version was used. The author
state a very small (3/80) patients answering Rome criteria. Can the authors explain this? How
many patients were diagnosed with chronic constipation of IBS-C according to Rome?
2- Citation for use of anorectal pressure probe is a non-validation study. Please provide
appropriate quotation or state accordingly
3- 'in house' norms are given without any reference. Was this based on healthy volunteers? other
publications? Please state if any or none.
4- Was informed consent written or verbal? Was it required by ethics?
Also:
Was full data for CSS and FISI available for all patients?
Although I agree with reviewer 1 regarding putting the main results into the manuscript body
of text, I do feel the authors have a bit over-shooted this. Currently information in the text is
repeated in the tables. I would recommend leaving only main results in the text and referring
for other info to the tables (page 5).
Typos:
Anal length should be 'shorter' not 'smaller' through-out
FIgure 1 has 'maximal urethral closure pressure' in it. Is this a typo?
Page 4 'not to activate an accidental the external anal sphincter reflex' to correct
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Effect of posture on anorectal manometric measurements in female patients with fecal
incontinence and rectoanal intussusception
Version: 6 Date: 20 Oct 2022
Reviewer:  Yoav Mazor
Reviewer's report:
I thank the authors for answering my comments. I do still have some queries regarding the major
comments, as well as some minor points:
Major comments:
1- Regarding IBS diagnosis: No citation is given for which rome version was used. The author
state a very small (3/80) patients answering Rome criteria. Can the authors explain this? How
many patients were diagnosed with chronic constipation of IBS-C according to Rome?
2- Citation for use of anorectal pressure probe is a non-validation study. Please provide
appropriate quotation or state accordingly
3- 'in house' norms are given without any reference. Was this based on healthy volunteers? other
publications? Please state if any or none.
4- Was informed consent written or verbal? Was it required by ethics?
Also:
Was full data for CSS and FISI available for all patients?
Although I agree with reviewer 1 regarding putting the main results into the manuscript body
of text, I do feel the authors have a bit over-shooted this. Currently information in the text is
repeated in the tables. I would recommend leaving only main results in the text and referring
for other info to the tables (page 5).
Typos:
Anal length should be 'shorter' not 'smaller' through-out
FIgure 1 has 'maximal urethral closure pressure' in it. Is this a typo?
Page 4 'not to activate an accidental the external anal sphincter reflex' to correct
assistant