SPECT/CT in the Evaluation of Suspected Skeletal Pathology
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is a very good, comprehensive review and I suggest only a couple of minor changes:
- Page 245 word "screws" is mentioned twice
- Spinal fusion surgery complications. When pseudoarthrosis is mentioned please mention also "transfer lesion" also as a postsurgical complication
- Lines 405-406 please revise the sentence
- Figure 10. The case is very educational but hard to follow the explanations since on planar images a large arrow is on the left ankle and the SPECT images discuss the findings on the right. I think an arrowhead on the right ankle too is needed on the planar image same color as in SPECT.
- Citation 102 ( before mentioning Figure 12 ) is probably incorrect since the article is discussing the AGA scintigraphy.
- Line 494 although correct, the phrasing is is confusing since sulfur-colloid is mentioned after Ga-67.
Author Response
please see attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This is a nice and well-written paper.
Figures are really nice and instructive.
I suggested some improvements:
- Fig.1 This is a monolateral spondylolysis, classically involving the isthmic part of the posterior arch of L5 vertebra. Specify-correct this in figure legend and moreover you should link this figure in the section "EVALUATION OF PAIN OF SPINAL ORIGIN"
- In your experience, may SPECT/CT have a role in the differential diagnosis between osteoporotic and neoplastic atraumatic vertebral fractures? Please, discuss briefly this point and add some data if you feel it pertinent and relevant.
- Please, in 'Introduction' section add some basic elements of SPECT study how it works from a physical point of view, to introduce and present the following section of the papers.
Author Response
please see attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
