Title: Hepatic venous pressure gradient after balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous
obliteration and liver stiffness measurement predict the prognosis of patients with gastric varices
Version: 1 Date: 18 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for inviting me to evaluate the article titled "Hepatic venous pressure gradient
after balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration and liver stiff measurement predict
the prognosis of the patients with gastric varices". In this paper, the authors investigated the
influences of HVPG and LSM on patients with GVs. However, it may be more excellent for
readers to understand the manuscript after revision. The following are the questions and some
mistakes in this manuscript.
1.  On page 5, Gastric varices are abbreviated "GV", however, in the manuscript, it seems not
unified, such as "GVs are less prevalent than esophageal varices and are present in 5-33% of the
patients with portal hypertension...". It may be more excellent to polish the manuscript.
2.  According to Baveno VII, BRTO is regarded as efficient secondary prophylactic treatment
technique management. In the present study, B-RTO was performed for preventive treatment
in 29 patients. Why?
3. Roc curves related to HVPG and LSM should be added if possible.
4. How to deal with coexisting EVs in the current study? And on Page 13, on lines 257-259,
“co-existence rates were similar to those- observed in previous reports (63.9 vs. 45.6–68.0%)”,
where does the literature come from?
5. It seems to be unclear to the reader about the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Title: Hepatic venous pressure gradient after balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous
obliteration and liver stiffness measurement predict the prognosis of patients with gastric varices
Version: 1 Date: 18 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for inviting me to evaluate the article titled "Hepatic venous pressure gradient
after balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration and liver stiff measurement predict
the prognosis of the patients with gastric varices". In this paper, the authors investigated the
influences of HVPG and LSM on patients with GVs. However, it may be more excellent for
readers to understand the manuscript after revision. The following are the questions and some
mistakes in this manuscript.
1.  On page 5, Gastric varices are abbreviated "GV", however, in the manuscript, it seems not
unified, such as "GVs are less prevalent than esophageal varices and are present in 5-33% of the
patients with portal hypertension...". It may be more excellent to polish the manuscript.
2.  According to Baveno VII, BRTO is regarded as efficient secondary prophylactic treatment
technique management. In the present study, B-RTO was performed for preventive treatment
in 29 patients. Why?
3. Roc curves related to HVPG and LSM should be added if possible.
4. How to deal with coexisting EVs in the current study? And on Page 13, on lines 257-259,
“co-existence rates were similar to those- observed in previous reports (63.9 vs. 45.6–68.0%)”,
where does the literature come from?
5. It seems to be unclear to the reader about the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Hepatic venous pressure gradient after balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous
obliteration and liver stiffness measurement predict the prognosis of patients with gastric varices
Version: 1 Date: 18 Nov 2022
Reviewer's report:
Thank you for inviting me to evaluate the article titled "Hepatic venous pressure gradient
after balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration and liver stiff measurement predict
the prognosis of the patients with gastric varices". In this paper, the authors investigated the
influences of HVPG and LSM on patients with GVs. However, it may be more excellent for
readers to understand the manuscript after revision. The following are the questions and some
mistakes in this manuscript.
1.  On page 5, Gastric varices are abbreviated "GV", however, in the manuscript, it seems not
unified, such as "GVs are less prevalent than esophageal varices and are present in 5-33% of the
patients with portal hypertension...". It may be more excellent to polish the manuscript.
2.  According to Baveno VII, BRTO is regarded as efficient secondary prophylactic treatment
technique management. In the present study, B-RTO was performed for preventive treatment
in 29 patients. Why?
3. Roc curves related to HVPG and LSM should be added if possible.
4. How to deal with coexisting EVs in the current study? And on Page 13, on lines 257-259,
“co-existence rates were similar to those- observed in previous reports (63.9 vs. 45.6–68.0%)”,
where does the literature come from?
5. It seems to be unclear to the reader about the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
assistant