Gordon K, Figueira ERR, Rocha-Filho JA, Mondadori LA, Joaquim EHG, Seda-Neto J, da Fonseca EA, Pugliese RPS, Vintimilla AM, Auler Jr JOC, Carmona MJC, D'Alburquerque LAC. Perioperative blood transfusion decreases long-term survival in pediatric living donor liver transplantation. World J Gastroenterol 2021; 27(12): 1161-1181 [PMID: 33828392 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v27.i12.1161]
Reader's ID:
02906184
Submitted on:
April 09, 2021, 04:42
Reader Expertise:
Reader’s expertise on the topic of the manuscript
Conflicts-of-Interest Statement:
Does the reader have a conflict of interest?
Reader Comment Standards for Published Articles:
1 Title
Does the title reflect the main subject/hypothesis of the manuscript?
2 Abstract
Does the abstract summarize and reflect the work described in the manuscript?
3 Key Words
Do the key words reflect the focus of the manuscript?
4 Background
Does the manuscript adequately describe the background, present status and significance of the study?
5 Methods
Does the manuscript describe methods (e.g., experiments, data analysis, surveys, and clinical trials, etc.) in adequate detail?
6 Results
Are the research objectives achieved by the experiments used in this study?
Has the study made meaningful contributions towards research progress in this field?
7 Discussion
Does the manuscript interpret the findings adequately and appropriately, highlighting the key points concisely, clearly and logically?
Are the findings and their applicability/relevance to the literature stated in a clear and definite manner?
Is the Discussion accurate and does it discuss the paper’s scientific significance and/or relevance to clinical practice sufficiently?
8 Illustrations and Tables
Are the figures, diagrams and tables sufficient, good quality and appropriately illustrative of the paper contents?
Do figures require labeling with arrows, asterisks, etc., or better legends?
9 Biostatistics
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of biostatistics?
10 Units
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of use of SI units?
11 References
Does the manuscript appropriately cite the latest, important and authoritative references in the Introduction and Discussion sections?
Does the author self-cite, omit, incorrectly cite and/or over-cite references?
12 Quality of manuscript organization and presentation
Is the manuscript concisely and coherently organized and presented?
Are the style, language and grammar accurate and appropriate?
13 Ethics statements
For all manuscripts involving human studies and/or animal experiments, author(s) must submit the related formal ethics documents that were reviewed and approved by their local ethical review committee. Did the manuscript meet the requirements of ethics?
Scientific Quality:
The overall quality of the manuscript, based on the above-listed criteria, should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories
Language Quality:
Language quality (style, grammar, and spelling) should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories.
Reader Comments:
This manuscript is a good collection of results that aim to determine the impact of hyper-transfusion on long term survival in pediatric living donor liver transplantation. Overall, the information are well collected. However, there are some important issues I would like to emphasize.
1. Method: The authors need to clarify what is (are) the primary outcomes of the study and what are the secondary outcomes of the study. The other minor findings can be described in the results but the discussion should be based on the outcomes of interest.
2. Results: Since hyper-transfusion may be the cause of an excess ten year mortality or an epiphenomenon (difficult patients, difficult medical care etc), the authors need to perform additional competing risk analysis to define the impact of hyper-transfusion on the ten year patient survival. As to the result, hyper-transfusion is significantly associated with 30 day reoperation and 30 day excess mortality, this factor need to be consider as a competing risk for long term survival. In addition, the impact of other set of risk factors should be analyzed for the association with ten year survival.
3. Discussion: Need to be reorganized according to the revised method and results.
4. The impact of hyper-transfusion on the outcome of pediatric living donor transplantation should be clearly stated.
5. Tables 3 and 5 . The information can be limited to what are related with the potential adverse events of hyper-transfusion on the primary and secondary outcomes.
Reply from the Editorial Office:
Firstly, thank you very much for your professional comments on the article published in World Journal of Gastroenterology.
Secondly, we read your comments with great interest. You are welcome to format your valuable comments into a Letter to the Editor, and submit it online to World Journal of Gastroenterology at https://www.f6publishing.com. There are no restrictions on the number of words, figures (color, B/W) or authors for Letter to the Editor. The article processing charge will be exempted for Letter to the Editor. The Letter to the Editor will be published online after peer review. The guidelines for Letter to the Editor can be found at: https://www.wjgnet.com/bpg/GerInfo/219.
Finally, we look forward to receiving your high-quality Letter to the Editor to promote academic communication and lead the development of this discipline.
Reader's ID:
01438831
Submitted on:
April 05, 2021, 05:53
Reader Expertise:
Reader’s expertise on the topic of the manuscript
Conflicts-of-Interest Statement:
Does the reader have a conflict of interest?
Reader Comment Standards for Published Articles:
1 Title
Does the title reflect the main subject/hypothesis of the manuscript?
2 Abstract
Does the abstract summarize and reflect the work described in the manuscript?
3 Key Words
Do the key words reflect the focus of the manuscript?
4 Background
Does the manuscript adequately describe the background, present status and significance of the study?
5 Methods
Does the manuscript describe methods (e.g., experiments, data analysis, surveys, and clinical trials, etc.) in adequate detail?
6 Results
Are the research objectives achieved by the experiments used in this study?
Has the study made meaningful contributions towards research progress in this field?
7 Discussion
Does the manuscript interpret the findings adequately and appropriately, highlighting the key points concisely, clearly and logically?
Are the findings and their applicability/relevance to the literature stated in a clear and definite manner?
Is the Discussion accurate and does it discuss the paper’s scientific significance and/or relevance to clinical practice sufficiently?
8 Illustrations and Tables
Are the figures, diagrams and tables sufficient, good quality and appropriately illustrative of the paper contents?
Do figures require labeling with arrows, asterisks, etc., or better legends?
9 Biostatistics
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of biostatistics?
10 Units
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of use of SI units?
11 References
Does the manuscript appropriately cite the latest, important and authoritative references in the Introduction and Discussion sections?
Does the author self-cite, omit, incorrectly cite and/or over-cite references?
12 Quality of manuscript organization and presentation
Is the manuscript concisely and coherently organized and presented?
Are the style, language and grammar accurate and appropriate?
13 Ethics statements
For all manuscripts involving human studies and/or animal experiments, author(s) must submit the related formal ethics documents that were reviewed and approved by their local ethical review committee. Did the manuscript meet the requirements of ethics?
Scientific Quality:
The overall quality of the manuscript, based on the above-listed criteria, should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories
Language Quality:
Language quality (style, grammar, and spelling) should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories.
Reader Comments:
This study is very important on the impact of perioperative blood transfusion for outcomes in PLDLT. There are few reports of these kinds on young patients, and this study is excellent including both short and long-term outcomes.
I could understand the negative effect of perioperative blood transfusion, but in this type of study, it remains a question whether blood transfusions are always bad or whether it is bad to have a condition that requires blood transfusions.
To clarify this issue, it seems necessary to equal the amount of blood loss and compare these cases with and without blood transfusion, if possible.
Reply from the Editorial Office:
Firstly, thank you very much for your professional comments on the article published in World Journal of Gastroenterology.
Secondly, we read your comments with great interest. You are welcome to format your valuable comments into a Letter to the Editor, and submit it online to World Journal of Gastroenterology at https://www.f6publishing.com. There are no restrictions on the number of words, figures (color, B/W) or authors for Letter to the Editor. The article processing charge will be exempted for Letter to the Editor. The Letter to the Editor will be published online after peer review. The guidelines for Letter to the Editor can be found at: https://www.wjgnet.com/bpg/GerInfo/219.
Finally, we look forward to receiving your high-quality Letter to the Editor to promote academic communication and lead the development of this discipline.