Next Article in Journal
Recurrent Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: The Current Treatment Options
Next Article in Special Issue
Elevated Glycated Haemoglobin (HbA1c) Is Associated with an Increased Risk of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A UK Biobank Cohort Study
Previous Article in Journal
Comparison of Clinical Subtypes of Breast Cancer within the Claudin-Low Molecular Cluster Reveals Distinct Phenotypes
Previous Article in Special Issue
Prospective Observational Study of Prevalence, Assessment and Treatment of Pancreatic Exocrine Insufficiency in Patients with Inoperable Pancreatic Malignancy (PANcreatic Cancer Dietary Assessment—PanDA)
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

The Impact of Post-Pancreatectomy Acute Pancreatitis (PPAP) on Long-Term Outcomes after Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Single-Center Propensity-Score-Matched Analysis According to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) Definition

Cancers 2023, 15(10), 2691; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15102691
by Giuseppe Quero 1,2,*, Claudio Fiorillo 1, Giuseppe Massimiani 1, Chiara Lucinato 1, Roberta Menghi 1,2, Fabio Longo 1, Vito Laterza 1, Carlo Alberto Schena 1, Davide De Sio 1, Fausto Rosa 1,2, Valerio Papa 1,2, Antonio Pio Tortorelli 1, Vincenzo Tondolo 3,† and Sergio Alfieri 1,2,†
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2:
Cancers 2023, 15(10), 2691; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers15102691
Submission received: 12 April 2023 / Revised: 2 May 2023 / Accepted: 7 May 2023 / Published: 10 May 2023

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The study is not hypothesis driven.

1)  Too many abbreviations, makes it easier to write but harder to read.  2)  Postpancreaticoduodenectomy pancreatitis was defined as as an increased amylsae level.  A lot of difference between pancreatitis and increased amylase levels.  3) The writing is poor, (e.g., "no-PPAP group). 4}  patients without PPAP had firmer glands and smaller pancreatic ducts, fewer postoperative serious complications, fewer POPF (which seem very frequent in general). Length of stay is long.  Adjuvant therapy was infrequently applied. Survival is not bad, without differences between groups. Thhis can be accepted with a rewrite if it is in the best interests of the journal, but iin its own merit it is of low to moderate priority.

Respectfully,

 

nothing to add.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript analyses the impact of post-pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis (PPAP) on long-term outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy. 32 patients (out of 231) were included in this single center retrospective series, and matched to 32 controls. Survival was not significantly different between groups.

This is a potentially interesting analysis. There are, however, several points the authors might want to address:

Why was the matching done in a 1:1 fashion, and not (especially considering the small cohort) in a 1:2 or 1:3 fashion? This would potentially increase the power of the analysis

It is quite surprising and counter-intuitive that the rate of adjuvant therapy was (although not significant) higher in the PPAP groups (53 vs 38%). Do the authors have any explanation for this? Could the authors provide data on the rate of adjuvant therapy in the whole cohort (and maybe also in those patients without complications.

Would it be possible to analyse grade B and C PPAP separately?

none - only minor checks required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop