Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This manuscript gives an overview of the computer-aided design (CAD) techniques for cranial reconstruction. Some examples of 3D skull defect reconstruction are given, with a brief description of the workflow involved.

The paper is generally well-written and the overview given is fairly informative, however the content of the manuscript could be more detailed. Some of the statements in the paper are quite general, and the quality could be improved by a more formal description. For example, on page 7, the authors state: “In general, superior aesthetic outcomes of CAM-derived alloplastic implants are significantly based on highly accurate 3-D CAD model.” But what is a highly accurate 3-D CAD model, and what resolution or number of triangles in the model is needed in order for the model to be highly accurate? The paper should also include a more detailed explanation of the boxes in Figure 1 (e.g. what is contour elevation, contour depression, etc. and what algorithms can be used for these steps).

Author Response

Our point-to-point response as attached file 

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Reviewer 2 Report

Please see attached the comments.

Comments for author File: Comments.docx

Author Response

Our point-to point response as attached file

Author Response File: Author Response.doc

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors have addressed most of the comments in the revised manuscript. The current version is suitable for publication.