Title: Endoscopic and Pathological Characteristics of Gastrointestinal Amyloidosis: A
Retrospective Analysis
Version: 1 Date: 08 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
In this article, the authors reported a retrospective analysis of gastrointestinal amyloidosis. While
this article may have some insights into GIA. I have some concerns and suggests below:
1. The introduction was too short, there was insufficient background for the readers.
2. Why did the patients underwent endoscopic evaluation? Did they have documented systematic
amyloidosis, or were with some gastrointestinal symptoms? This issue is highly important in
clinical practice and should be clearly mentioned.
3.How could 14 patients with small intestine samples (rather than duodenum) when only one
patient underwent enteroscopy?
4. Is there any clinical implication for focal amyloidosis with normal appearing gastrointestinal
mucosa?
5. In discission, the authors stated mucosal biopsy should be performed even with normal
appearing mucosa. I'd say it depends on the indication for endoscopic exam, and it's not practical
since GIA were so rare.
6. I suggest the authors  should provide the total exam amount during the period in order to
estimate the prevalence of GIA in this hospital cohort and compare to other reports.
Title: Endoscopic and Pathological Characteristics of Gastrointestinal Amyloidosis: A
Retrospective Analysis
Version: 1 Date: 08 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
In this article, the authors reported a retrospective analysis of gastrointestinal amyloidosis. While
this article may have some insights into GIA. I have some concerns and suggests below:
1. The introduction was too short, there was insufficient background for the readers.
2. Why did the patients underwent endoscopic evaluation? Did they have documented systematic
amyloidosis, or were with some gastrointestinal symptoms? This issue is highly important in
clinical practice and should be clearly mentioned.
3.How could 14 patients with small intestine samples (rather than duodenum) when only one
patient underwent enteroscopy?
4. Is there any clinical implication for focal amyloidosis with normal appearing gastrointestinal
mucosa?
5. In discission, the authors stated mucosal biopsy should be performed even with normal
appearing mucosa. I'd say it depends on the indication for endoscopic exam, and it's not practical
since GIA were so rare.
6. I suggest the authors  should provide the total exam amount during the period in order to
estimate the prevalence of GIA in this hospital cohort and compare to other reports.
Please review this paper.
user
Title: Endoscopic and Pathological Characteristics of Gastrointestinal Amyloidosis: A
Retrospective Analysis
Version: 1 Date: 08 Jan 2025
Reviewer's report:
In this article, the authors reported a retrospective analysis of gastrointestinal amyloidosis. While
this article may have some insights into GIA. I have some concerns and suggests below:
1. The introduction was too short, there was insufficient background for the readers.
2. Why did the patients underwent endoscopic evaluation? Did they have documented systematic
amyloidosis, or were with some gastrointestinal symptoms? This issue is highly important in
clinical practice and should be clearly mentioned.
3.How could 14 patients with small intestine samples (rather than duodenum) when only one
patient underwent enteroscopy?
4. Is there any clinical implication for focal amyloidosis with normal appearing gastrointestinal
mucosa?
5. In discission, the authors stated mucosal biopsy should be performed even with normal
appearing mucosa. I'd say it depends on the indication for endoscopic exam, and it's not practical
since GIA were so rare.
6. I suggest the authors  should provide the total exam amount during the period in order to
estimate the prevalence of GIA in this hospital cohort and compare to other reports.
assistant