“Non-Parasitic” and “Non-Iatrogenic” Chyluria: Its Diagnosis and Treatment

Review Data

Q: Is the topic relevant to the journal area of interest? Is it contemporary and interesting for

researchers?

A: Very good

Abstract & Keywords

Q: Are all required components included in the abstract? Are the keywords appropriately chosen?

A: Very good

Goal

Q: Is the goal explicitly stated in the Introduction? Is its formulation clear and unambiguous?

Comments: Not applicable.

Structure

Q: Is the paper's structure coherent? Is it in coherence with the goal of the paper?

A: Good

Tools and Methods

Q: Are methods the author uses adequate and well used?

A: Very good

Discussion & Conclusion

Q: Is it related to the results presented before? Do you consider them as coherent?

A: Very good

Comments: The case description is adequate. The Discussion section thoroughly describes the clinical investigations, diagnosis and management of non-parasitic and non-iatrogenic chyluria. It illustrates the significance of open lymphadenectomy and renal and ureteral intraperitonealization to manage the disease.

Literature

Q: Does the author utilize relevant literature?

A: Good

Author's knowledge

Q: What is the level of the author’s knowledge? Does the author utilize all recent contributions relevant to the topic?

A: Good

Length

Q: Is the length of the paper adequate to the significance of the topic? Do you suggest shortening the paper without losing its value?

A: Good

Figures & Tables

Q: Does the author use them suitably? Are legend and notations clear?

A: Very good

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Weak

Comments:

·       In the 2^nd sentence of the Abstract, the word “When” should be replaced with “In” before “non-parasitic”, “diseases” should be inserted after “iatrogenic” and “communication” should be replaced with “communicate”.

·       In the 3^rd sentence of the Abstract, the word “clinic” should be removed after “urinary retention”.

·       Words like “para-aortic”, “cig/day”, “eupnoeic” are misspelled in the text section of the manuscript.

·       In the 2^nd sentence of the 1^st paragraph of the Clinical Case, the word “alvo” does not make sense. Therefore, it should be replaced with the correct word.

·       In the 1^st sentence of the 2^nd paragraph of the Clinical Case, “of suffering from” should be replaced with “and”.

·       The 1^st sentence of the 7^th paragraph of the Clinical Case should be rephrased as “During this hospitalization, protein immunofixation in the urine/Bence Jones was also performed which showed negative result.”

·       The 6^th sentence of the 8^th paragraph of the Clinical Case should be rephrased as “During the hospitalization, he also performed pelvis and spinal MRI with not so clinically relevant results.”

Further comments on the paper

Comments: This case report presents a rare case of non-parasitic and not-iatrogenic chyluria in a 62-year-old patient. This case represents a model of diagnosis and treatment of such complex cases as it highlights the importance of para-aortic and renal hilum lymphadenectomy and intraperitonealization of the kidney and left ureter to successfully resolve chyluria. 1 year after the surgery, the patient, despite a free and high-fat diet, has not shown the reappearance of chyluria.

Q: Would you recommend this manuscript for further publication?

A: Yes - Suitable to be published

If you have any questions and clarifications you can write to the journal.

Thanks,
Science Repository Team