AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2690-8808/240
1 Department of Surgery, Nile University of Nigeria and Asokoro District Hospital, Abuja.
2 Division of Paediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital, and College of Health Sciences, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria.
3 Division of Paediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, Modibo Adama University Teaching Hospital, Yola, Adamawa State, Nigeria.
4 Paediatric Surgery unit, Department of Surgery, Federal Medical Centre, Abeokuta, Nigeria.
5 Surgery Department, George Elliot Hospital, Nuneaton, UK.
6 Department of Surgery, Bowen University Teaching Hospital, Ogbomoso, Oyo state, Nigeria.
*Corresponding Author: Muslimat Alada, Department of Surgery, Nile University of Nigeria and Asokoro District Hospital, Abuja.
Citation: M. A. Alada, A.A. Nasir, L.O. AbdurRahman, A.O. Oyinloye, N. T. Abdulraheem, et. al., (2024), Comparative Study of Effect of Nasogastric Tube Decompression on Bowel Activity and Time to Oral Intake After Laparotomy in Children, J, Clinical Case Reports and Studies, 6(1); DOI:10.31579/2690-8808/240
Copyright: ©, 2024, Muslimat Alada. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 01 January 2025 | Accepted: 21 January 2025 | Published: 27 January 2025
Keywords: postoperative ileus; nasogastric tube decompression; laparotomy; paediatric laparotomy
Background: The belief that nasogastric (NG) decompression reduces vomiting from ileus after laparotomy is based largely on tradition. The aim of this study was to determine the need for nasogastric decompression after laparotomy in children.
Objective: To compare the safety and effectiveness of nasogastric decompression and no decompression after laparotomy in children.
Methods: The study was a prospective clinical trial among patients, 15 years and below, undergoing laparotomy at University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital. Consecutive patients were randomized into NG tube group and no NG tube group. All patients were assessed for time to full oral intake, time to return of bowel motility, vomiting and abdominal distension
Results: Both groups were comparable in terms of age, sex, diagnosis and procedure performed. Mean time to return of bowel motility was 2.54±0.74 days in NG tube group compared to 2.81±0.40 days in no NG tube group (p=0.09). Mean time to commencement of oral intake was 2.43±0.10 days in NG tube group compared to 2.56±0.85 days in no NG tube group (p=0.56) . Mean time to full oral intake was 4.59±1.5 days in NG tube group compared to 4.26±1.0 days in no NG tube group (p=0.34). Abdominal distension occurred in 2 patients with NG tube compared to 9 of those that had no NG tube (p=0.02). Three patients in NG tube and 2 in no NG tube had postoperative vomiting (p=1.00).
Conclusion: There was no statistically significant difference in risk of postoperative vomiting, abdominal distension, mean time to return of bowel motility and mean time to full oral intake after laparotomy in both groups.
Surgical practice entails some routines which have evolved by elimination of many variables to achieve safe outcomes.[1] One of such routines practiced for the past 50 years is postoperative nasogastric (NG) decompression.1 Despite the paucity of properly designed studies to support the theoretical advantages, this routine is still the standard practice of most adult and paediatric surgeons. [2-7]
Normal bowel motility results from interactions between the enteric nervous system, central nervous system, and humoral factors affecting smooth-muscle activity.[7] Food is propelled through the small and large intestine by peristalsis, under the control of humoral and neural system. During this process, digestion and absorption of nutrients, water, electrolytes, and minerals occurs.[7]
Following laparotomy, motility and absorption capacity of the small bowel returns within a few hours.[1,8,9] Although small bowel is mobile, it contains little fluid or gas and therefore does not generate bowel sounds until the stomach resumes activity after 24 hours, pushing swallowed air and fluid into the bowel. The gas that reaches the small bowel is then rapidly emptied into the caecum. However, the colon remains inert for a long time (48 - 72 hours), with the passage of flatus or stool as a marker for motility. [8,9]
After laparotomy, physiologic ileus resolves spontaneously within 2-3 days.[8,9] It may be prolonged for more than 5 days when it is described as postoperative paralytic ileus.[8,9]
Post-operative ileus is mediated via activation of inhibitory spinal reflex arcs which are classified anatomically into ultra-short, short and long reflexes involving bowel wall, prevertebral ganglia and spinal cord respectively.[10] Other factors such as metabolic response to surgical trauma, opioids and anaesthesia may also be contributory.[7-9,11]
Clinical consequences of post-operative ileus include immobilization, with associated discomfort, increased risk of pulmonary complications and enhanced catabolism because of poor nutrition. Post-operative ileus is usually associated with abdominal distension which has been thought to be responsible for the increase incidence of these post-operative complications, hence the routine use of NG tube for post-operative decompression. This practice has enjoyed widespread acceptance for the past eight decades without consideration for patients’ complaints.8 Reason for its use varied across disciplines; anaesthetists use it to prevent aspiration and postoperative nausea and vomiting, while surgeons were concerned (in addition to the aforementioned) with prevention of wound dehiscence, incisional hernia and anastomotic leakage.[8]
The possible serious complications associated with use of routine postoperative nasogastric tube have not been appreciated by most clinicians. In fact it is regarded so lightly by some surgeons that some may consider abdominal operation as its sole indication.[12]
Some studies have shown that nasogastric decompression does not shorten time to first bowel movement or decrease time to adequate oral intake and the inappropriate use may contribute to post-operative complications in patients.[3,7,13] Dinsmore et al in 1997 questioned routine nasogastric decompression after major abdominal surgery in children, establishing that it is particularly unnecessary in children older than two years.[2] St. Peter et al in 2007, after a retrospective study of children who had surgery for perforated appendix also suggested that nasogastric tube contributes to patient’s discomfort and increases time to commencement of oral intake and full oral intake and therefore should be regarded as an adjunct to symptom control and not a method of preventing complications or shortening postoperative course.[7] Despite these evidences, many surgeons still practice routine nasogastric decompression. A re-evaluation of this routine use is therefore necessary.
Most of the studies that have been carried out on this topic are in adult population and are mostly retrospective and, at best, case series with unanswered questions as to whether non-use of nasogastric intubation shortened time to resumption of oral feeding, whether it hastened discharge from hospital, and whether it produced fewer complications.
The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of the use of nasogastric decompression or non-decompression on time of resumption of oral intake, time to full oral intake, vomiting and abdominal distension after laparotomy in children.
The study was a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study among children aged 15 years and below who underwent laparotomy in University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital from December 2016 and November 2017.
Informed consent was obtained from parents/guardians and assent from children >10 years from patients recruited from the paediatric outpatient clinic and emergency paediatric unit of the hospital. All consecutive patients who met the inclusion criteria were randomized into either the treatment (NG tube) group or control (no NG tube) group by asking blinded observer to pick a sealed envelope before induction of anaesthesia which was then opened just before closure of the abdominal wall.
Inclusion Criteria
All patients aged 15 years and below undergoing laparotomy during the study period
Exclusion Criteria
1. Patients with intestinal atresia
2. Patients with ASA Score > 3
4. Patient who had gastric surgery
5. Patients on gastrostomy
6. Patient who were undergoing re-operation
Preoperative details
All patients had standard routine preoperative evaluation and preparation for laparotomy. All procedures were done under general anaesthesia with endotracheal intubation. Standard anaesthetic care including drugs and fluid therapy were applied to all patients and recorded.
Prophylactic antibiotics where given as indicated.
Operative details
Strict adherence to operative principles with meticulous handling was ensured intra-operatively and nature of the procedure was recorded for all patients. A sealed envelope attached to the patient chart was opened by the anaesthetist before closure of the abdomen in all cases. The content of the envelope indicated whether nasogastric tube should be passed or not.
For group 1, appropriate sized NG tube was inserted by the anaesthetist just before closure of the abdomen (if not previously passed) or any NG tube already passed preoperatively is left in situ for drainage.
For group 11, any nasogastric tube placed preoperatively or intra-operatively was removed at the end of the procedure and was not replaced unless vomiting, gross abdominal distension or obstruction occurs in the postoperative period. No NG tube was inserted in those who did not have it preoperatively.
Postoperative details
All patients were maintained on appropriate management indicated by the procedure.
Graded oral intake was commenced at onset of bowel activity which was indicated by presence of two or more of: normoactive bowel sounds, clearance of NG tube effluent and passage of flatus/feaces. The time of commencement of oral intake and time to full oral intake were recorded. Morbidity(ies) incurred were also recorded.
All patients were assessed for abdominal distension at 4 hours, 24 hours, 48 hours, 4 days and 7 days. Vomiting and features of aspiration of gastric contents were also watched out for.
Data was analyzed using statistical package for social sciences (SPSS version 20.0 SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA)). P-value less than 0.05 was accepted as significant. Tables, and charts were used to report descriptive statistics, while mean and standard deviation (SD) were provided for continuous variables.
Of the 56 patients in this study, 28 were in each group. Their age ranged between 10 days and 15 years, mean age was 88.3±56 months. NG tube group had 15 males and the no NG tube group had 14 males.
The mean age in the NG tube group was 92.1±57 months and that of no NG tube group was 84.5±56 months. More than two-third of the patient were between 5 and 15 years in both groups. Table 1 shows sex and age distribution of the patients
| Variables | NGT (n=28) n(%) | No NGT(n=28) n(%) | P value |
| Sex | 0.79 | ||
| Male | 15(53.6) | 14(50.0) | |
| Female | 13(46.4) | 14(50.0) | |
| Mean age (months) +- standard deviation | 92.1+-57 | 84.5+-56 | 0.62 |
| Age groups | 0.25 | ||
| <28> | 1(3.6) | 0(0.0) | |
| 28 days to 12 months | 3(10.7) | 6(21.4) | |
| 12 months to <5years> | 4(14.3) | 2(7.1) | |
| 5 years to <10> | 7(25.0) | 12(42.9) | |
| 10 years to 15 years | 13(46.4) | 8(28.6) | |
| NGT= Nasogastric tube |
Table 1: Sex and age distribution
Nine patients in NG tube group and 10 of those in no NG tube group had ruptured appendicitis. Thirty six percent of patients in NG tube group had typhoid intestinal perforation, compared with 21.4% in no NG tube group. These differences were however not statistically significant (p=0.54).
Both groups were well matched in the type of procedure done as shown in table 2.
| Variables | NGT (n=28) n(%) | No NGT (n=28) n(%) | Total | P value |
| Diagnosis | 0.54 | |||
| Ruptured appendicitis | 9(32.1) | 10(35.7) | 19 | |
| Typhoid intestinal Perforation | 10(35.7) | 6(21.4) | 16 | |
| Intussusception | 6(21.4) | 8(28.6) | 14 | |
| PUJ obstruction | 1(3.6) | 2(7.1) | 3 | |
| Nephroblastoma | 0(0.0) | 2(7.1) | 2 | |
| Malrotation | 1(3.6) | 0(0.0) | 1 | |
| Splenic rupture | 1(3.6) | 0(0.0) | 1 | |
| NGT=Nasogastric tube, PUJ=Pelviureteric junction | ||||
Table 2: Mode of presentation and diagnosis
Mean time to return of bowel motility was 2.54±0.74 days in NG tube group compared to 2.81±0.40 days in no NG tube group, p=0.09. Twenty five percent of the patients on NG tube had return of bowel motility on the 1st postoperative day. Of the patients who had NG tube, 32.1% had return of bowel motility on the 3rd postoperative day compared to 39.3% of those who had no NG tube. The differences observed between the two groups in relation to procedures performed did not reach statistical significance as shown in table 3.
| Return of bowel motility | Small bowel surgery | Large bowel surgery | Appendicectomy | Transperitoneal nephrectomy | Transperitoneal pyeloplasty | Splenectomy | Total | P VALUE | |
| 1st DPO | NGT | 3 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7(25) | 0.35 |
| No NGT | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3(10.7) | ||
| 2nd DPO | NGT | 4 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8(28.6) | 0.47 |
| No NGT | 1 | 2 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 10(35.7) | ||
| 3rd DPO | NGT | 5 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9(32.1) | 0.60 |
| No NGT | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 11(39.3) | ||
| 4th DPO | NGT | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4(14.3) | 1.00 |
| No NGT | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3(10.7) | ||
DPO= post operative day NGT= Nasogastric tube | |||||||||
Table 3: Time to return of bowel motility
As shown in figure 1, mean time to commencement of oral intake was 2.43±0.10 days in NG tube group compared to 2.56±0.85 days in no NG tube group (p=0.56). 10 patients in NG tube and 12 in no NG tube group commenced oral intake on the 3rd postoperative day. These differences were not statistically significant (p=0.78)
Figure 1: Time to commencement of oral intake
Mean time to full oral intake was 4.59±1.5 days in NG tube group compared to 4.26±1.0 days in no NG tube group (p=0.34) as shown in figure 2.
Figure 2: time to full oral intake
Abdominal distension occurred in 2(7.1%) patients with NG tube compared to 9(32.1%) of those that had no NG tube (p=0.02). Five of the patients in no NG tube group had NG tube passed due to significant abdominal distension.
Three patients in NG tube and 2 in no NG tube had postoperative vomiting. The 2 patients in no NG tube group had NG tube passed and 1 out of the 3 patients in NG tube group required re-passage of the tube after initial removal on account of persistent post-operative vomiting.
The socio-demographic characteristics, diagnosis and procedures performed in this study were comparable in both groups. The most common diagnoses in this study were ruptured appendicitis (33.9%) and Typhoid intestinal perforation (28.6%). This is comparable to another study where the most common diagnosis among subjects studied was ruptured appendicitis and perforation of gastrointestinal tract.[14]
There was no statistically significant difference in mean time to return of bowel motility between the 2 groups (2.54±0.74 days in NG tube group and 2.81±0.40 in no NG tube group). In contrast, other authors who have reported longer duration in patients who had decompression compared to those who didn’t.[15-17,19] Wolff et al,[1] reported longer mean time to return of bowel activity in both groups (3.9 days) in a similar study, although there was no significant difference between the 2 groups.[1] In studies by Zhou et al and Abatanga, patients who had NG tube removed within 12 to 24 hours after surgery had earlier return of bowel motility compared to those who had routine NG tube decompression.[12,14]
The similarity in mean time to return of bowel motility observed in the two groups studied may be explained by the fact that postoperative ileus is mediated by multiple factors such as autonomic nervous system, anaesthesia, metabolic response to trauma and postoperative medications and may not be directly influenced by the use of NG tube alone. [7,8,10,12]
The mean time to commencement of oral intake was 2.43±0.10 days in the NG tube group and 2.56±0.85 days in no NG tube group. There was no statistically significant difference between both groups (p=0.60). However, some authors reported earlier commencement of oral feeding in no NG tube group,[4,7,14,17,18,20,21] while others have reported earlier commencement of oral feeding in the NG tube group.[15] In a review of 166 children who underwent abdominal surgeries, Abatanga,[14] also reported a significant decrease in the mean time to first oral sips in those patients with the NGT removed within 24 hours after an abdominal surgical procedure as compared to those in who NG tube was left in situ for 3-5 days.[14]
The time to commencement of oral intake in this study is significantly affected by time to return of bowel motility which is in turn dependent on other factors which may not be related to the use of NG tube alone.
The difference in mean time to full oral intake was not statistically significant between both groups (4.59±1.5 days in the NG tube group vs 4.26±1.0 days in the no NG tube group, p=0.34), similar to reports by Davila-Perez et al,[21] in a study comparing use and non-use of NG tube among children undergoing elective distal bowel anastomoses where they reported 5.2±0.41 days in NG tube group and 5.1±0.6 days in no NG tube group. In a report by St Peter et al,[7] time to full oral intake was significantly longer in patients who had decompression compared to those who didn’t. There is also report of significantly shorter time to full oral intake in patients who didn’t have routine decompression in similar studies. [14,18]
A larger percentage of patients in no NG tube group had abdominal distension compared with those in no NG tube group (32.1% of patients in no NG tube vs 7.1% of those in NG tube group, p=0.02). This is similar to finding in a meta-analysis by Cheatham et al. [3] Although the incidence of abdominal distension was increased in the absence of NG tube, only five of the 9 patients who had persistent abdominal distension with splinting of the diaphragm in the no NG tube group had the tube passed for them. This therefore means that, the use of NG tube can still be avoided even in some cases of abdominal distension after laparotomy.
The incidence of vomiting in this study was higher in NG tube group compared with no NG tube group (10.7% of patients in NG tube group versus 7.1% of those in no NG tube group), although this difference did not reach not statistical significance. This was comparable to findings from previous studies. [4,7,8]NG tube was passed for 2(7.1%) the patients in no NG tube group who had persistent vomiting post operatively and 3.6% of those in the NG tube group in this study also needed re-placement of the tube after initial removal. Thus, 92% of the patients in this study avoided routine NG tube decompression. Only 7.1% of the patients in no NG tube group needed an NG tube passed, which is similar to the report of 11% by Dinsmore et al. [2] Some other studies however found significant decrease in incidence of nausea, vomiting and abdominal distension in patients who had NG tube. [1,19]
There are literature reports of an increase in incidence of post-operative vomiting in the absence of NG tube decompression.[15] Cheatham et al observed in a meta-analysis comparing selective versus routine nasogastric decompression after elective laparotomy that 8.5% of routinely decompressed patients still had vomiting while on NG tube.[3] The finding of vomiting in patients with NG tube in this study is supported by literature report that the use of NG tube does not completely eliminate the risk of vomiting, as up to 10% of patients who have NG tube decompression may still vomit after laparotomy.[8,17]
This study has shown that the use of nasogastric tube for decompression postoperatively did not significantly affect time to return of bowel motility, time to commencement and time to full oral intake after laparotomy in children. Although incidence of abdominal distension increased in the absence of NG tube, most of the patients still did well without having the tube re-passed.
A multicenter study with larger sample size is recommended to create more robust and widely acceptable findings from this study.
Limitations of the Study
In view of the findings in this study, we recommend that nasogastric tube decompression should not be a routine practice after laparotomy in children, except in clear cases of intractable postoperative vomiting and persistent abdominal distension where it may be useful for the relief of significant gastrointestinal symptoms. Postoperative NG tube decompression is also recommended in patients with high risk of vomiting and abdominal distension such as patients with intestinal atresia, patients who have had gastric surgery and very sick patients with ASA class 111 and above.
A multicenter study with larger sample size is recommended to create more robust and widely acceptable findings from this study
Conceptualization, Resources, Project administration, Methodology, Writing- original draft preparation: (Muslimat Ajibola Alada)
Conceptualization, Writing- Review and editing, formal analysis: (Alada Muslimat Ajibola), (Abdulrasheed Nasir) And Lukman Olajide Abdurrahman)
Ratification, Supervision: (abdulrasheed nasir) and (lukman olajide abdurrahman) and (james olaniyi adeniran)
Data collection: (muslimat ajibola alada), (adewale olaotan oyinloye), (nurudeen toyin abdulraheem), (olanrewaju moses), (chibueze nwosu)
We declare no conflict of interest in the conduct of this study.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
I would like to offer my testimony in the support. I have received through the peer review process and support the editorial office where they are to support young authors like me, encourage them to publish their work in your esteemed journals, and globalize and share knowledge globally. I really appreciate your journal, peer review, and editorial office.
Dear Agrippa Hilda- Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, "The peer review process was very quick and of high quality, which can also be seen in the articles in the journal. The collaboration with the editorial office was very good."
I would like to express my sincere gratitude for the support and efficiency provided by the editorial office throughout the publication process of my article, “Delayed Vulvar Metastases from Rectal Carcinoma: A Case Report.” I greatly appreciate the assistance and guidance I received from your team, which made the entire process smooth and efficient. The peer review process was thorough and constructive, contributing to the overall quality of the final article. I am very grateful for the high level of professionalism and commitment shown by the editorial staff, and I look forward to maintaining a long-term collaboration with the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
To Dear Erin Aust, I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation for the opportunity to have my work published in this esteemed journal. The entire publication process was smooth and well-organized, and I am extremely satisfied with the final result. The Editorial Team demonstrated the utmost professionalism, providing prompt and insightful feedback throughout the review process. Their clear communication and constructive suggestions were invaluable in enhancing my manuscript, and their meticulous attention to detail and dedication to quality are truly commendable. Additionally, the support from the Editorial Office was exceptional. From the initial submission to the final publication, I was guided through every step of the process with great care and professionalism. The team's responsiveness and assistance made the entire experience both easy and stress-free. I am also deeply impressed by the quality and reputation of the journal. It is an honor to have my research featured in such a respected publication, and I am confident that it will make a meaningful contribution to the field.
"I am grateful for the opportunity of contributing to [International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews] and for the rigorous review process that enhances the quality of research published in your esteemed journal. I sincerely appreciate the time and effort of your team who have dedicatedly helped me in improvising changes and modifying my manuscript. The insightful comments and constructive feedback provided have been invaluable in refining and strengthening my work".
I thank the ‘Journal of Clinical Research and Reports’ for accepting this article for publication. This is a rigorously peer reviewed journal which is on all major global scientific data bases. I note the review process was prompt, thorough and professionally critical. It gave us an insight into a number of important scientific/statistical issues. The review prompted us to review the relevant literature again and look at the limitations of the study. The peer reviewers were open, clear in the instructions and the editorial team was very prompt in their communication. This journal certainly publishes quality research articles. I would recommend the journal for any future publications.
Dear Jessica Magne, with gratitude for the joint work. Fast process of receiving and processing the submitted scientific materials in “Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions”. High level of competence of the editors with clear and correct recommendations and ideas for enriching the article.
We found the peer review process quick and positive in its input. The support from the editorial officer has been very agile, always with the intention of improving the article and taking into account our subsequent corrections.
