Next Article in Journal
Sorghum Allelopathy: Alternative Weed Management Strategy and Its Impact on Mung Bean Productivity and Soil Rhizosphere Properties
Next Article in Special Issue
Optical Coherence Tomography Reflectivity in Foveal Cysts: A Novel Biomarker for Early-Response Prediction of Diabetic Macular Edema Treated with Dexamethasone
Previous Article in Journal
COVID-19 Infection and Response to Vaccination in Chronic Kidney Disease and Renal Transplantation: A Brief Presentation
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Adaptive Optics Imaging to Analyze the Photoreceptor Layer Reconstitution in Acute Syphilitic Posterior Placoid Chorioretinopathy

Life 2022, 12(9), 1361; https://doi.org/10.3390/life12091361
by Fabrizio Giansanti 1, Stefano Mercuri 1,*, Lorenzo Vannozzi 1, Andrea Govetto 2, Angelo Maria Minnella 3,4, Tomaso Caporossi 3,4, Alfonso Savastano 3,4, Maria Cristina Savastano 3,4, Gloria Gambini 3,4, Stanislao Rizzo 3,4,5, Gianni Virgili 1 and Daniela Bacherini 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Life 2022, 12(9), 1361; https://doi.org/10.3390/life12091361
Submission received: 30 July 2022 / Revised: 19 August 2022 / Accepted: 23 August 2022 / Published: 31 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Novel Diagnosis and Therapeutics Approaches in Retina Diseases)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

please open the attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewer, we are grateful for the opportunity of submitting a revised version of our manuscript. We have corrected and implemented the text, following the useful suggestions of the Reviewers. We hope that our efforts can be positively considered.

See the attached file for Reply to Reviewer 1

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Giansanti and colleagues provide a really nice depiction of the longitudinal progression of Acute Syphilitic Posterior Placoid Chorioretinopathy. The presentation and figures are of high quality and the idea of using adaptive optics to image photoreceptors in such lesions is sufficiently novel to warrant publication.

My first and major concern is the small sample size (3 eyes) which I understand is justifiable by the rare incidence of the disorder. However, such a small sample does not support the comparative statistical testing done by the authors.

My second concern is the possible misinterpretation of photoreceptor density owing to the segmentation capacity of the AO machine. In early involvement, placoid lesions protrude inwards into the outer retinal tissue, which could result in inward pushing of the outer retinal layers (as obvious in figure 4). Since it is assumed that the AO acquires a single flat focus of the photoreceptor layer, the devoid areas may be due to even segmentation rather than actual disruption.

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewer,
We are grateful for the opportunity of submitting a revised version of our manuscript.
We have corrected and implemented the text, following the useful suggestions of the Reviewers.
We hope that our efforts can be positively considered.

Sincerely yours,

Stefano Mercuri

Please find comments in the attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors used AOSLO imaging to analyze patients with acute syphilitic posterior placoid chorioretinopathy. The disease is rare and the approach is novel. However, the most critical flaw of the study is that they analyzed only two patients. The result would be more suitable to case report journals. Other comments are below.

 

1.       The authors showed decreased cone density in patients at presentation, and it partially recovered after two months. However, it is believed that cone cells do not increase its number. The measurement certainly reflect some changes, but the device cannot differentiate the absence and inability to image cone cells. Actually, Figure 3 panel G is blurred indicating that imaging an disease eye is challenging.

2.       Cone density and spacing was calculated from 4 ROI in each eye. It is OK for normal eyes and some dystrophy with homogenous degeneration. But in the investigated disease, the result may be totally different depending on the investigated area. Anyway, the result is from two patients and statistical analysis is not very relevant to the study design.

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewer,

We are grateful for the opportunity of submitting a revised version of our manuscript.

We have corrected and implemented the text, following the useful suggestions of the Reviewers.

We hope that our efforts can be positively considered.

 

Sincerely yours,

 

Stefano Mercuri

 

Please find comment in the attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors improved the manuscript significantly. The reviewer has no further comment, but still think the paper is suitable to more specialized journals.

Back to TopTop