Next Article in Journal
Photoperiod Conditions Modulate Serum Oxylipins Levels in Healthy and Obese Rats: Impact of Proanthocyanidins and Gut Microbiota
Next Article in Special Issue
Noninvasive Ventilation and Rapid Enteral Feeding Advances in Preterm Infants—2-Year Follow-Up of the STENA-Cohort
Previous Article in Journal
Dietary Intake Levels of Iron, Copper, Zinc, and Manganese in Relation to Cognitive Function: A Cross-Sectional Study
Previous Article in Special Issue
Early Naso-Gastric Feeding and Outcomes of Anorexia Nervosa Patients
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Home Parenteral Nutrition for Children: What Are the Factors Indicating Dependence and Mortality?

by Ying-Cing Chen 1, Chia-Man Chou 2,3,4, Sheng-Yang Huang 2,3,4,* and Hou-Chuan Chen 2
Submission received: 26 December 2022 / Revised: 26 January 2023 / Accepted: 29 January 2023 / Published: 30 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Nutritional Management of Gastrointestinal Dysfunction in Children)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors

This is a very informative paper on this topic. I would review the references in order to update them if you think it is appropriate

Author Response

Thank you for your opinions. We checked the cited references and hoped to get your comments in detail.

Reviewer 2 Report

This is the analysis of 24 cases of pediatric intestinal failure.

The number of participants is very limited, there is a number of larger series presented so far. 

I have some major comments:

1. The HPN-dependency is associated with the quality of intestinal rehabilitation such as early enetral feeding introduction, we have no data what procedure you use in your center,

2. The parenteral admixture composition, and the lipid emulsion is also crucial for the weaning and intestinal rehabilitation. We have no data on parenteral admixture composition and the types of formulation used. 

3. Infwctious complicatins: what is the definition of CRBSI, whal was the ethiology of infections?

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable opinions. The authors acknowledged that the series is small and listed the limitations in the final portion of the discussion (lines 362-366). Please see the attachment for responses to the comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors answered my comments.

Back to TopTop