All reviews of published articles are made public. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials. Note: This was optional for articles submitted before 13 February 2023.
Peer reviewers are encouraged (but not required) to provide their names to the authors when submitting their peer review. If they agree to provide their name, then their personal profile page will reflect a public acknowledgment that they performed a review (even if the article is rejected). If the article is accepted, then reviewers who provided their name will be associated with the article itself.
I am writing to inform you that your manuscript - The efficacy comparison on femoral vein hemodynamics and morphology between two types of graduated elastic compression stockings among patients undergoing knee replacement: a single center, double-blind, randomized trial - has been Accepted for publication. Congratulations!
[# PeerJ Staff Note - this decision was reviewed and approved by Stefano Menini, a PeerJ Section Editor covering this Section #]
The study is well-conducted and the methodology is sound. However, while the results are presented clearly, it might be helpful for the authors to provide a more detailed justification for the selected pressure gradients of the compression stockings, as this is a key factor influencing the efficacy of the intervention.
The article is well written using clear, unambiguous and technically correct text. It has sufficient background and background, relevant literature is mentioned. The structured tables are clearly written.
Research question is well defined. The investigation is conducted rigorously. Sufficient details are well written. Ethical issues is in conformity with ethical standards.
Conclusions are well stated and linked to original research question.
No comment
The purpose of this trial was to compare the effects of two GCSs on femoral vein hemodynamics and morphology, and this choice of topic is of interest.
1. Regarding the sample size of the study: the sample size of this study should be calculated through the formula for sample size calculation and relevant software.
2. It is recommended to add the limitations of this study by reporting about more possible influencing factors that may exist to affect the results of the study.
1. Based on the current research process and statistical methods are relatively reasonable.
2. the conclusion section should focus on the discussion of the results derived from this study and reduce unnecessary expansion.
The article is written in professional and clear English, meeting the standards of scientific literature. The introduction and literature review provide sufficient contextual information regarding the issue of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) following knee replacement and the efficacy of different types of compression stockings. Citations of relevant sources are appropriate and adequately justify the need for this study. The structure of the article follows the standard format of scientific publications with clearly separated sections for methods, results, and discussion. Figures and tables are clear and sufficiently descriptive. All necessary raw data have been provided in accordance with PeerJ's data-sharing policy.
The study represents original primary research within the journal's scope. The research question is well-defined and relevant, focusing on comparing two types of compression stockings in patients undergoing knee replacement. The methodology is described in detail, providing sufficient information for replication. Randomization was performed using a generated schedule, minimizing bias. Ethical approval was obtained, and informed consent was collected from all participants, ensuring a high ethical standard.
The results are presented clearly and logically, with appropriate use of statistical methods. The data are robust and statistically supported. The discussion addresses the research question and appropriately interprets the results in relation to the literature. The conclusions are well-stated and aligned with the obtained data. The study also offers interesting recommendations regarding the use of compression stockings combined with ankle pumps following knee replacement surgery.
The authors have done an excellent job in conducting this study. It would be beneficial to consider extending the follow-up period to better assess the long-term effects of compression stockings. Additionally, including more information on the selection of specific pressure gradients for the stockings would be useful. It is also recommended to account for potential individual differences among patients that may influence the intervention's efficacy.
The article meets all the requirements for publication in PeerJ. I recommend its acceptance after minor revisions, focusing on a more detailed discussion of the results and the rationale behind the choice of specific pressure gradients.
Revision of the English grammatic is necessary.
Materials and methods, Assessment, Lines 139-43, “… compressions of type A GCS were as following: 8 mmHg-ankle, 13 mmHg-crus, 10 mmHg-popliteal fossa, 8 mmHg-middle thigh and 6 mmHg-upper thigh … compressions of type B GCS were as following: 8 mmHg-ankle, 14 mmHg-crus, 8 mmHg-popliteal fossa, 8 mmHg-middle thigh and 6 mmHg-upper thigh”: why the two groups do not differ only in the ankle pump, but also in the mmgHs? Please, explain.
No comment.
Introduction, lines 92-5, “The reported incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients without prophylaxis was 40% to 84% after knee replacement1-5, while the prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) ranged from 1.8% to 7%, significantly increasing the risk of in-hospital mortality 6; 7”: I would change this paragraph as “The reported incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in patients without prophylaxis was 40% to 84% after knee replacement1-5. Even if the true morbidity and mortality rates of untreated DVT are unknown (Cho JS, Martelli E, Mozes G, Miller VM, Gloviczki P. 1998. Effects of thrombolysis and venous thrombectomy on valvular competence, thrombogenicity, venous wall morphology, and function. J Vasc Surg. 28(5):787-99 DOI: 10.1016/s0741-5214(98)70053-9), the prevalence of pulmonary embolism (PE) ranged from 1.8% to 7%, significantly increasing the risk of in-hospital mortality6,7”.
Materials and methods
Study design and participants
- Line 122, “… 141 …”: this is a result of your study, therefore it should be reported not here but in the results section.
- Line 123-4, “… any predisposition to thromboembolism …”: be consistent with the acronyms already introduced, change in “… any predisposition to VTE …”.
Randomization, line 134, “… SAS 9.4 software …”: City, State, and Country of the manufacturer?
Assessment, lines 144-5, “… Zhende Medical Co., Ltd. China”: City of the manufacturer?
Statistical analysis
- Line 181, “… timepoint A … timepoint B …”: you should clearly state what is A and B.
- Line 192, “… SAS 9.4 software (USA, Cary, NC) …”: better to write “… SAS 9.4 software (Cary, NC, USA) …”.
Results
Characteristics of study patients
- Line 204, “… peak velocity … trough velocity …”: be consistent with the acronyms already introduced, change in “… PV … TV …”.
Primary and secondary outcomes of type A and B GCS
- Lines 211, 216, and 218, “… trough velocity … peak velocity …”: be consistent with the acronyms already introduced, change in “… TV … PV …”.
Differences between legs, line 226, “… trough velocity …”: be consistent with the acronyms already introduced, change in “… TV …”.
Discussion
- Lines 234, 237, 262, and 266 “… trough velocity … peak velocity …”: be consistent with the acronyms already introduced, change in “… TV … PV …”.
- Lines 289-90, “Previously, a previous nation-wide survey …”: delete “Previously”.
Conclusion, line 303, “… trough velocity …”: be consistent with the acronyms already introduced, change in “… TV …”.
All text and materials provided via this peer-review history page are made available under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.