Review Reports
- James Walter1,2,
- Ioan Hutu3 and
- Berndt Tomancok4
- et al.
Reviewer 1: Anonymous Reviewer 2: Shiv Verma Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The study by Walter et al. introduce new electrode design for direct bladdder wall stimulation (DBWS). The authors present the results of DBWS using new electrodes in the pilot study in three animals.
The objective could be relevant for the readers of the journal.
Methods and results are clearly presented.
The study is well done and has a important clinical message.
I have only some minor point to be addressed:
line 260: correct term dyssinergia
Author Response
Please see the file attached.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The author have tested two new electrode design, composed of a monopolar multi stranded, stainless-steel wire, which we expected to be less prone to migration and to allow for wider separation of the stimulating tips finding mentioned in the manuscript is important to avoid the bladder pressure that can cause upper tract deterioration, vesico ureteric reflux, hydronephrosis, renal impairment and finally end-stage renal chronic disease. I have some points which needs attention such as:
- is the current amplitude used in the experiment was as adjusted based on the bladder state.
- What was the bladder volume and pressure before and after the implantation of electrodes?
- What was the final voiding efficiency of the electrodes?
Author Response
Please see the file attached.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The article is interesting due to its presentation of a bladder stimulation technique. I would like the extended version of the animal model. Otherwise I have no objections
Author Response
Please see the file attached.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf