Submited on: 18 Jul 2011 11:43:26 AM GMT
Published on: 19 Jul 2011 07:29:43 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:

      we have appreciaqted the  original  idea  of reflux preventing by means of  a single loop techniaqe with double  anastomosis : the biliary   diversion upside and   adequate distance ( 40 cm ) of gastrenterostomy to achieve  an optimal  downflow of gastric contents

  • Competing interests:
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
  • References:
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    I'm a upper G:I: tract surgeon

  • How to cite:  Palmieri B .unresectable pancreatic head cancer: double palliative by-pass with a single roux-en Y jejunal Loop[Review of the article 'Unresectable Pancreatic Head Cancer: Double Palliative By-pass with a Single Roux-en.Y Jejunal Loop. ' by Manenti A].WebmedCentral 2011;2(7):WMCRW00864
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse