Review Form 1.

Journal Name: Asian Journal of Research in Surgery

Manuscript Number: Ms_AJRS_69119

Title of the Manuscript: Correlation between the closest pin distance of the fracture line to the stability of the external fixation: a biomechanical study on bovine tibia

Type of the Article Original Research Article

General guideline for Peer Review process:

This journal’s peer review policy states that NO manuscript should be rejected only on the basis of ‘lack of Novelty’, provided the manuscript is scientifically robust and technically sound.
To know the complete guideline for Peer Review process, reviewers are requested to visit this link:

(http://peerreviewcentral.com/page/manuscript-withdrawal-policy)

PART 1: Review Comments

Reviewer’s comment Author’s comment (if agreed with reviewer, correct the
manuscript and highlight that part in the manuscript. It is
mandatory that authors should write his/her feedback here)

Created by: EA Checked by: ME Approved by: CEO Version: 1.6 (10-04-2018)
 Review Form 1.6
Compulsory REVISION comments Agree, all corrections have been highlighted on the manuscript

Results and Discussion:

1) This should be split into two separate sections- one for “Results” and one for
“Discussion”
2) The following line should either be listed in the introduction or early in the discussion
section. It does not belong towards the end of the discussion as it is currently. “This type
of fixation was first introduced by Lambotte in the early 20th century. 1,9,12 Anderson and
Hoffman modified Lambotte’s invention by developing and customizing pin clamps that
could manipulate fractures in all 3 dimensions (a precursor to many modern external
fixations currently in use).12”

Conclusion:
1) You mention that “there is a relationship between the closest pin distance and the
compressive strength of the external fixation” - What is the relationship then? Is it a direct
or an inverse relationship? Maybe you should clarify by mentioning something like
“Shorter pin distances from the fracture line were associated with increased compressive
strength.”
2) What is the clinical significance of your findings? Are there any disadvantages to putting
the pins closer to the fracture site? Maybe list something like, “According to the results of
this study, a surgeon should place external fixation pins as close as possible to the
fracture site in order to achieve the strongest fixation. This however must be balanced
with a surgeon’s desire to keep pins far away from the zone of injury to avoid
contamination for a planned second procedure in the future.

Minor REVISION comments Introduction: Agree, all corrections have been highlighted on the manuscript
1) Grammatical errors- consider revising to,“It is indicated as part of damage control
measures, especially in patients with severe soft tissue damage where it may be used as a
definitive treatment for fractures.”

2) What is “F0” - please explain what this means.

Materials and Methods:

1) Capitalize “Dr.” rather than “dr.”

Optional/General comments

PART 2:

Reviewer’s comment
(If yes, Kindly please write down the ethical issues here in details)
Are there ethical issues in this manuscript?
Author’s comment (if agreed with reviewer, correct the manuscript and
highlight that part in the manuscript. It is mandatory that authors should write
his/her feedback here)
There was no ethical issue

Created by: EA Checked by: ME Approved by: CEO Version: 1.6 (10-04-2018)
 Review Form 1.6

Reviewer Details:

Name: Anonymous Reviewer, Reviewer preferred to be anonymous.

Department, University & Country

Created by: EA Checked by: ME Approved by: CEO Version: 1.6 (10-04-2018)