Title: Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (with videos):
a single center retrospective study
Version: 2 Date: 15 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
I think this is an excellent paper comparing UEMR and ESD for NETs. I hope that my comment
is useful for the improvement of the article.
1) (Page 4, Line 6) The authors described there is no clinical evaluation on UEMR in the
resection of rectal NETs. However, there are already three published papers about UEMR for
NETs. (PMID: 29344571, PMID: 31904380, PMID: 34133614) However, those papers did not
compare to ESD, did not follow up properly, and did not examine symptoms and costs, so the
authors' should just mention this point.
1) (page 3 line 16) The author described the probability of lymph node metastasis in #10 mm
rectal NETs is low. Please provide a reference.
2) (page 4, line 20) Was the diagnosis confirmed by a preoperative biopsy?
3) (page 4, line 25) Please provide the number of EMR experiences of the endoscopists.
4) (page 2, line 10, 95.5%) and (page 9, line 25, Therefor) is misspelled.
Title: Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (with videos):
a single center retrospective study
Version: 2 Date: 15 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
I think this is an excellent paper comparing UEMR and ESD for NETs. I hope that my comment
is useful for the improvement of the article.
1) (Page 4, Line 6) The authors described there is no clinical evaluation on UEMR in the
resection of rectal NETs. However, there are already three published papers about UEMR for
NETs. (PMID: 29344571, PMID: 31904380, PMID: 34133614) However, those papers did not
compare to ESD, did not follow up properly, and did not examine symptoms and costs, so the
authors' should just mention this point.
1) (page 3 line 16) The author described the probability of lymph node metastasis in #10 mm
rectal NETs is low. Please provide a reference.
2) (page 4, line 20) Was the diagnosis confirmed by a preoperative biopsy?
3) (page 4, line 25) Please provide the number of EMR experiences of the endoscopists.
4) (page 2, line 10, 95.5%) and (page 9, line 25, Therefor) is misspelled.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for rectal neuroendocrine tumors (with videos):
a single center retrospective study
Version: 2 Date: 15 Mar 2022
Reviewer's report:
I think this is an excellent paper comparing UEMR and ESD for NETs. I hope that my comment
is useful for the improvement of the article.
1) (Page 4, Line 6) The authors described there is no clinical evaluation on UEMR in the
resection of rectal NETs. However, there are already three published papers about UEMR for
NETs. (PMID: 29344571, PMID: 31904380, PMID: 34133614) However, those papers did not
compare to ESD, did not follow up properly, and did not examine symptoms and costs, so the
authors' should just mention this point.
1) (page 3 line 16) The author described the probability of lymph node metastasis in #10 mm
rectal NETs is low. Please provide a reference.
2) (page 4, line 20) Was the diagnosis confirmed by a preoperative biopsy?
3) (page 4, line 25) Please provide the number of EMR experiences of the endoscopists.
4) (page 2, line 10, 95.5%) and (page 9, line 25, Therefor) is misspelled.
assistant