Submited on: 24 Jun 2013 05:51:02 PM GMT
Published on: 25 Jun 2013 04:55:12 AM GMT

The article from Albaniais aim to evaluate the role of ultrasound for the gallbladder polyps.    The title is “Evaluation and ultrasound follow-up of the gallbladder polyps”.

I have some questions.  The authors should be clarified and be added the following issues in the text.    

 

  1. The specificity and sensitiviy of the ultrasound for the evaluation of gallbladder polyps.  What is the gold standard?    
  2. The authors did not show the cost-effectiveness of the ultrasound.
  3. The clinical application is very important.   The authors should be recommended the readers to apply this knowledge into routine clinical practice.          

 

     Thank you so much

 

  • Invited by the author to make a review on this article? :
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science: None
  • Publications in the same or a related area of science: No
  • References: None
 
Report abuse
 

Comment:

This paper might have been hurriedly prepared. No recommended method has been followed by the author in writing this article for journal publication.

It is very difficult to interpret any useful scientific facts out of this study. The author has preferred to quote only references. He has not given the facts derived from his study except two facts.

Was it a retrospective study or prospective? What was the duration of the study?

 

The author has mentioned that he has examined 3680 ambulatory patients? What type of patients? What type of examinations? Nothing is mentioned.3680 patients in how many months or years?

 

The statistical facts given are not reflecting the true incidences or prevalence of gallbladder polyps.

 

Reviewed data collected regarding patients’ gender, age, symptoms, serum cholesterol levels, serum low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels, serum high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol levels, serum triglyceride levels etc were not given

 

 

The author has not mentioned any detail about the methodology followed in his study. What was the type of probe used, was it confirmed by any additional methods of ultrasonography studies such as usage of esophageal endoscopic probes, harmonic imaging study, high-resolution study etc.

 

The paper has no details of the result of the study.

 

No radiological description given about polyps involved in this study.

Number of polyps, single or multiple? What was the size range <10 mm and above 10 mm? Sessile or pedunculated? What were their locations? How many of them are benign? How many are malignant? What were the criteria applied to differentiate benign from malignancy?

 

Nothing was mentioned about the respective GB. Elongated, contracted, walls thickened or not? Regular or irregular? Associated with cholecystitis or not? How was the cystic/CBD?

 

  • competing interests: NO
  • Invited by the author to make a review on this article? :
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    36 years

  • Publications in the same or a related area of science: No
  • References: None
 
Report abuse