Premature Physeal Closure after a Non-Displaced Physeal Fracture of Distal Fibula

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: Good

Goal

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

A: Good

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: 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, with the help of adequate relevant literature, determines the significant factors responsible for causing premature physeal closure (PPC) after a non-displaced physeal fracture of distal fibula which may lead to progressive angular deformity or leg length discrepancy. It also illustrates the effectiveness of osteotomy to correct both the valgus and anterior distal tibia angle (ADTA). Further research is required to identify the predictive factors which cause PPC after a non-displaced physeal fracture of distal fibula.

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: Very 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: Good

Writing style

Q: Is it clear and understandable?

A: Good

Comments:

·       In the 2^nd sentence of the 1^st paragraph of the Case Report, the preposition “on” should be inserted before “radiographs”.

·       In the 2^nd sentence of the 2^nd paragraph of the Case Report, the preposition “to” should be inserted after “Prior” and “with” should be inserted after “football”.

·       The 5^th sentence of the last paragraph of the Discussion does not make sense. Hence, the sentence should be separated and reframed as “PPC might have been diagnosed earlier. Follow-up would have been longer, but it is not reasonable to follow-up on all patients for several years.”

·       The word “interosseous” is misspelled in the text section of the manuscript.

Further comments on the paper

Comments: This case report presents a case of a non-displaced physeal fracture of the distal fibula leading to premature physeal closure (PPC) several years after the initial injury in a 8-year-old boy. This is the first reported case of a non-displaced Peterson III (SH-I) fracture that developed a significant angular deformity and leg length discrepancy caused by the shortened fibula several years after the initial injury due to low energy trauma which led to premature physeal arrest. It throws light upon the determining factors which result in PPC as well as emphasizes on the importance of closing wedge osteotomy to treat angular deformity. The patient recovered after the surgery and remained symptomless despite slight instability of his ankle in the frontal plane at the last follow-up. Further research is required to improve the understanding of the predictive factors of PPC and follow-up protocols in physeal fractures.

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