Submited on: 27 Sep 2010 03:00:37 PM GMT
Published on: 27 Sep 2010 03:24:20 PM GMT
 
interesting smart work
Posted by Dr. Ahmed F Kotb on 29 Apr 2012 06:38:26 PM GMT

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? Yes
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? Yes
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? Yes
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? No
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? Yes
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    as my title said, that is smart work.

    i am saying that because i am uro-oncology surgeon. i do TRUS biopsy very frequent since 2005. i did thousands of cases and i don't really have any single mortality that can be attributed to the procedure. actually; i only had one case that was hypertensive and developed sreoke the second day post procedure, and, thanks for God, he is currently in good health.

    i accept with you the rate of mortality should be revised. I am doing some work on my own data concerning rate of complications. i will be happy if you may like doing multi-institutional work.

    i am not sure why the study of mortality specified 120 days post procedure, i find that long period, and i am not sure of the true base of that.

  • Competing interests:
    No
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I am uro-oncology surgeon.

  • How to cite:  Kotb A F.interesting smart work[Review of the article 'Incidence of Trans Rectal Ultra Sound Guided Prostatic Biopsy Related Mortality ' by Bluhm S].WebmedCentral 2012;3(4):WMCRW001749
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse
 

  • Other Comments: it is an interesting article and the difference in mortality is impressive.it would be important to know that why Galia et al followed the patients for 120 days when post op mortality by defination is with in 30 days.the number of cases in Galia et al study is indeed large but i wonder whether the number of cases will increase incidence of mortality in your study.
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    Yes
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:
    None
  • How to cite:  Hussain S Z.Incidence Of Trans Rectal Ultra Sound Guided Prostatic Biopsy [Review of the article 'Incidence of Trans Rectal Ultra Sound Guided Prostatic Biopsy Related Mortality ' by Bluhm S].WebmedCentral 2012;1(10):WMCRW0060
Report abuse