Title: Comparison of the efficacy and safety between rivaroxaban and dabigatran in the
treatment of acute portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis
Version: 2 Date: 17 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
This retrospective study compared the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban and dabigatran in the
treatment of acute portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis.
Major
During the follow-up period, what is the frequency for follow-up imaging? How to define
recanalization or persistent occlusion?
What is the median follow-up time for the included patients.
Did the included patients continuous taking anticoagulation? Otherwhile, there is no meaning
of the long-term follow-up result for the comparison of these two drugs.
The improvement of child-pugh score and meld score did not equal to the improvement of
cirrhosis, please clarify.
Did any patients suffered from the intestinal necrosis that required surgery? This information
was not shown in the study.
Minor
As mentioned in the inclusion criteria: acute PVT: developed symptoms <60 days and in the
absence of portal cavernoma or portal hypertension. Did the author exclude patients with portal
hypertension? However, most of the included patients had esophageal varices.
How did the author mean by low-dose anticoagulation, please give the detailed definition.
There is something wrong with the Ethics approval document, please reupload the updated
version.
Isolated thrombosis of superior mesenteric vein or splenic vein was excluded, but not showed
in the study flow chart.
Title: Comparison of the efficacy and safety between rivaroxaban and dabigatran in the
treatment of acute portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis
Version: 2 Date: 17 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
This retrospective study compared the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban and dabigatran in the
treatment of acute portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis.
Major
During the follow-up period, what is the frequency for follow-up imaging? How to define
recanalization or persistent occlusion?
What is the median follow-up time for the included patients.
Did the included patients continuous taking anticoagulation? Otherwhile, there is no meaning
of the long-term follow-up result for the comparison of these two drugs.
The improvement of child-pugh score and meld score did not equal to the improvement of
cirrhosis, please clarify.
Did any patients suffered from the intestinal necrosis that required surgery? This information
was not shown in the study.
Minor
As mentioned in the inclusion criteria: acute PVT: developed symptoms <60 days and in the
absence of portal cavernoma or portal hypertension. Did the author exclude patients with portal
hypertension? However, most of the included patients had esophageal varices.
How did the author mean by low-dose anticoagulation, please give the detailed definition.
There is something wrong with the Ethics approval document, please reupload the updated
version.
Isolated thrombosis of superior mesenteric vein or splenic vein was excluded, but not showed
in the study flow chart.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Comparison of the efficacy and safety between rivaroxaban and dabigatran in the
treatment of acute portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis
Version: 2 Date: 17 Jun 2023
Reviewer's report:
This retrospective study compared the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban and dabigatran in the
treatment of acute portal vein thrombosis in cirrhosis.
Major
During the follow-up period, what is the frequency for follow-up imaging? How to define
recanalization or persistent occlusion?
What is the median follow-up time for the included patients.
Did the included patients continuous taking anticoagulation? Otherwhile, there is no meaning
of the long-term follow-up result for the comparison of these two drugs.
The improvement of child-pugh score and meld score did not equal to the improvement of
cirrhosis, please clarify.
Did any patients suffered from the intestinal necrosis that required surgery? This information
was not shown in the study.
Minor
As mentioned in the inclusion criteria: acute PVT: developed symptoms <60 days and in the
absence of portal cavernoma or portal hypertension. Did the author exclude patients with portal
hypertension? However, most of the included patients had esophageal varices.
How did the author mean by low-dose anticoagulation, please give the detailed definition.
There is something wrong with the Ethics approval document, please reupload the updated
version.
Isolated thrombosis of superior mesenteric vein or splenic vein was excluded, but not showed
in the study flow chart.
assistant