Reviewer's report
Title:Use of Pethidine for Percutaneous Liver Biopsy - A Randomised,
placebo-controlled, double blind study - original article
Version:4Date:8 December 2014
Reviewer: Daiuske Masuda
Reviewer's report:
Comment: This article is a first report, which is a randomized placebo controlled,
double blind study about use of pethidine for percutaneous liver biopsy.
Percutaneous liver biopsy is a gold standard procedure for diagnosis of unknown
liver diseases. The article’s contents are that pethidine administration resulted in
significantly lower pain scores and requires less analgesia immediately after liver
biopsy in comparison to the placebo group, however there was significant
difference in the pain score and analgesia requirement one hour after procedure,
pain score at 24 hour after procedure and retrospective pain score, and that
pethidine use had not impacted on pain score and retrospective pain at 24 hours
after procedure. The results of article are interesting, moreover it is significant
that it is randomized and double blind study.
Major compulsory revisions1:
I think that pethidine use is effective during procedure of percutaneous from your
results, then I consider it is necessary. Indeed from your results, pethidine is not
long term effect, you need to discuss with each patients whether you use
pethidine or not. You do not need any medicine before percutaneous liver
biopsy? If you think another medicine is necessary before procedure except for
local anesthesia, what kind of medicine do you need?
Major compulsory revisions2:
You refer that pethidine is less effective for patients’ willing to undergo a
repeated procedure. I think this less effect is regrettable. But patients’ willing or
anxiety result from invasion of procedure naturally it is not thought to be related
to effect of some medicine. Indeed partially anxiety or willing to undergo a
repeated procedure must be relieved by some medicine, in fact it is difficult to
relief by only medicine. How do you think about?
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Reviewer's report
Title:Use of Pethidine for Percutaneous Liver Biopsy - A Randomised,
placebo-controlled, double blind study - original article
Version:4Date:8 December 2014
Reviewer: Daiuske Masuda
Reviewer's report:
Comment: This article is a first report, which is a randomized placebo controlled,
double blind study about use of pethidine for percutaneous liver biopsy.
Percutaneous liver biopsy is a gold standard procedure for diagnosis of unknown
liver diseases. The article’s contents are that pethidine administration resulted in
significantly lower pain scores and requires less analgesia immediately after liver
biopsy in comparison to the placebo group, however there was significant
difference in the pain score and analgesia requirement one hour after procedure,
pain score at 24 hour after procedure and retrospective pain score, and that
pethidine use had not impacted on pain score and retrospective pain at 24 hours
after procedure. The results of article are interesting, moreover it is significant
that it is randomized and double blind study.
Major compulsory revisions1:
I think that pethidine use is effective during procedure of percutaneous from your
results, then I consider it is necessary. Indeed from your results, pethidine is not
long term effect, you need to discuss with each patients whether you use
pethidine or not. You do not need any medicine before percutaneous liver
biopsy? If you think another medicine is necessary before procedure except for
local anesthesia, what kind of medicine do you need?
Major compulsory revisions2:
You refer that pethidine is less effective for patients’ willing to undergo a
repeated procedure. I think this less effect is regrettable. But patients’ willing or
anxiety result from invasion of procedure naturally it is not thought to be related
to effect of some medicine. Indeed partially anxiety or willing to undergo a
repeated procedure must be relieved by some medicine, in fact it is difficult to
relief by only medicine. How do you think about?
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
Please review this paper.
user
Reviewer's report
Title:Use of Pethidine for Percutaneous Liver Biopsy - A Randomised,
placebo-controlled, double blind study - original article
Version:4Date:8 December 2014
Reviewer: Daiuske Masuda
Reviewer's report:
Comment: This article is a first report, which is a randomized placebo controlled,
double blind study about use of pethidine for percutaneous liver biopsy.
Percutaneous liver biopsy is a gold standard procedure for diagnosis of unknown
liver diseases. The article’s contents are that pethidine administration resulted in
significantly lower pain scores and requires less analgesia immediately after liver
biopsy in comparison to the placebo group, however there was significant
difference in the pain score and analgesia requirement one hour after procedure,
pain score at 24 hour after procedure and retrospective pain score, and that
pethidine use had not impacted on pain score and retrospective pain at 24 hours
after procedure. The results of article are interesting, moreover it is significant
that it is randomized and double blind study.
Major compulsory revisions1:
I think that pethidine use is effective during procedure of percutaneous from your
results, then I consider it is necessary. Indeed from your results, pethidine is not
long term effect, you need to discuss with each patients whether you use
pethidine or not. You do not need any medicine before percutaneous liver
biopsy? If you think another medicine is necessary before procedure except for
local anesthesia, what kind of medicine do you need?
Major compulsory revisions2:
You refer that pethidine is less effective for patients’ willing to undergo a
repeated procedure. I think this less effect is regrettable. But patients’ willing or
anxiety result from invasion of procedure naturally it is not thought to be related
to effect of some medicine. Indeed partially anxiety or willing to undergo a
repeated procedure must be relieved by some medicine, in fact it is difficult to
relief by only medicine. How do you think about?
Level of interest: An article of limited interest
Quality of written English: Acceptable
Statistical review: Yes, and I have assessed the statistics in my report.
assistant