Submited on: 16 Mar 2012 08:39:32 AM GMT
Published on: 17 Mar 2012 07:14:58 AM GMT
 
We do the same
Posted by Dr. Gabriel Conca on 14 Apr 2012 08:44:26 PM GMT

1 Is the subject of the article within the scope of the subject category? Yes
2 Are the interpretations / conclusions sound and justified by the data? Yes
3 Is this a new and original contribution? No
4 Does this paper exemplify an awareness of other research on the topic? No
5 Are structure and length satisfactory? No
6 Can you suggest brief additions or amendments or an introductory statement that will increase the value of this paper for an international audience? No
7 Can you suggest any reductions in the paper, or deletions of parts? No
8 Is the quality of the diction satisfactory? Yes
9 Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable? No
10 Are the references adequate and are they all necessary? Yes
11 Are the keywords and abstract or summary informative? Yes
  • Other Comments:

    Strenghts:

    Inclusion of fluoroscopy for visualization of TP for  localization of lumbar plexus could resulte in successful block in patients where localization based on anatomical landmarks failed.

     

    Limits:

    More studies are required to prove its definitive role and the number of cases is not large!

  • Competing interests:
    no
  • Invited by the author to review this article? :
    No
  • Have you previously published on this or a similar topic?:
    No
  • References:
    None
  • Experience and credentials in the specific area of science:

    anaesthesia practitioner

  • How to cite:  Conca G .We do the same[Review of the article 'An Easy Solution for Successful Lumbar Plexus Block in Arthroplasty Surgery of Patients with Poorly Defined Landmarks ' by Jadon A].WebmedCentral 2012;3(4):WMCRW001684
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Report abuse