Life-Threatening Necrotizing Pneumonia with Panton–Valentine Leukocidin-Producing, Methicillin-Sensitive Staphylococcus aureus in a Healthy Male Co-Infected with Influenza B
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article is a well written one. The authors should ad more details about the methods they used for the identification of the bacterias involved.
please ad 3 short conclusions.
Thank you!
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The research work done by Sara Agnete Hjort Larsen research group “Life Threatening Necrotizing Pneumonia with Panton-Valentine Leukocidin-producing Methicillin-Sensitive Staphylococcus aureus in a Healthy Male Co-Infected with Influenza B” describes a good protocol for the study of staphylococcus aureus in a healthy male co-infected with Influenza B. Authors successfully documented efficient and simple protocol for the understanding of gram positive bacteria effect in a healthy male. This protocol is new and there are not many literature reports detailed with this particular study. This protocol has broad applicability in health care sector for further application and development. Given the importance of practicality for this work, I recommend the publication of this manuscript in the infectious disease reports.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript entitled “Life Threatening Necrotizing Pneumonia with Panton-Valentine Leukocidin-producing Methicillin-Sensitive Staphylococcus aureus in a Healthy Male Co-Infected with Influenza B” is about the case report for the pneumonia patient with MSSA.
Manuscript is well written but need some modification to be published
Authors need double check the minor in-consistent like PaCO2 5.0 kPa, decreased PaO2 9.5 kPa, leukocyte levels 5 x 10^9/L (line 66) and 1 x 109/L (line 83)
Authors need to provide some more detailed testing microbiological method that used to identify the bacteria.
Authors need to change to italic style of the name of microorganism even in references.
And I do not understand what is the reference 16?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
The article hasn't scientific interest. Materials and methods must be improved
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx