AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2690-4861/130
1 Clinique de l’Archette, 83 rue Jacques Monod - 45160 Olivet, France.
2 Clinique du parc Drevon, 18 cours général de Gaulle - 21000 Dijon, France.
3 Pôle Rachis Doscea, 1 allée du Dr Robert Lafon - 64100 Bayonne, France.
4 Cheltenham Spine Clinic, United Kingdom.
5 Quanta Medical Group, 16 avenue des Chateaupieds – 92500 Rueil-Malmaison, France.
6 Cousin Biotech, Allée des Roses - 59117 Wervicq-Sud, France.
7 Clinique d’Argonay, RGDS, 685 route de Menthonnex- 74370 Argonay, France.
*Corresponding Author: Doan Co-Minh, Clinique de l’Archette, 83 rues Jacques Monod- 45160 Olivet France
Citation: D. Co- Minh, C. Vajeu, L Montron, C. E. W. Aylott, R. Boulkedid. (2021) Surgical outcomes of patients with degenerative lumbar disc disease post-IntraSPINE® device fixation: Three-year prospective study. International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. 8(1); DOI: 10.31579/2690-4861/130
Copyright: © 2021 Doan Co-Minh, This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 07 April 2021 | Accepted: 01 June 2021 | Published: 30 July 2021
Keywords: spine surgery; IntraSPINE®; interlaminar device; degenerative lumbar disc disease; low back pain
Background: Lumbar degenerative disc disease is one of the most common conditions associated with chronic low back pain. IntraSPINE® is a novel inter-laminar device that allows more physiological rocking-type movements in flexion and extension.
Aim: To evaluate the results of patients with symptomatic Lumbar degenerative disc disease treated with an IntraSPINE® device and followed up over a 3-year period.
Materials and Methods: A Prospective longitudinal research study involving patients with imaging-confirmed Lumbar degenerative disc disease in whom conservative treatment was unsuccessful. Outcome measures were changes over baseline score on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and low back and radicular pain assessed at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months postoperatively. Overall success, a composite outcome that included key safety and clinical considerations, was assessed. Secondary outcomes included satisfaction with symptoms, employment status and post-surgery medical interventions. To compare differences in longitudinal clinical score patterns over 36 months, a mixed-effect model ANCOVA with repeated measurements was performed, with adjustment for low back and radicular pain score and ODI score at baseline.
Results: 231 patients were recruited and 180 completed the study. A significant improvement in ODI score (p=0.0597), as well as in VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) scores for back (p= 0.0228) and leg pain (p<0.0001) was observed during the follow-up. For ODI score, the mean percentage decrease from inclusion to month 36 was 64.5%. These scores were respectively 66.2% for radicular pain and 46.4% for low back pain. In 73% of cases, surgery was considered successful. 89% of working patients returned to work and 68% of patients were very satisfied at month 12. Only four patients presented intraoperative complications.
A variety of diseases can cause low back pain (LBP), one of which is degenerative lumbar disc disease (DDD) [1]. When conservative treatment fails, surgery may be considered. Although the rationale for surgery is often unclear, and despite the lack of convincing evidence regarding the effectiveness of surgery in the treatment of symptomatic DDD, the number of surgical procedures performed is continually increasing [2,3]. Yet the presence of LBP and DDD can support the placement of an interspinous device (ISD) [4–8].
The reported indications for ISDs are diverse and include degenerative spinal stenosis, discogenic LBP, facet syndrome, disc herniation and instability [9, 10].
IntraSPINE® is a novel device that, unlike interspinous positioned implants, is unique in being placed more anteriorly in an interlaminar position, closer to the normal center of rotation of the motion segment [11, 12]. Mechanical advantages are thus conferred over more posteriorly positioned devices through the possibility of more physiological ‘rocking’ type movements in flexion and extension [13,14]. This enables IntraSPINE® to off-load the facet joints in extension without blocking movement. Having a more anteriorly placed fulcrum also helps control excessive flexion movements by virtue of an improved lever arm in conjunction with an intact posterior tension band [15] .
The aim of this three-year prospective study is to report the results of patients with symptomatic DDD who were treated using an IntraSPINE® device. After a follow-up period of 36 months, we evaluated the clinical and safety results of the IntraSPINE® device in the treatment of DDD patients.
A prospective study was performed throughout the period from November 21, 2012 to December 20, 2017. It was conducted at 4 French clinics specializing in spinal surgery and involved one surgeon at each clinic. Patients were recruited from November 21, 2012 to December 1, 2014.
Patients with symptomatic LBP and / or radicular pain, with imaging confirmed DDD at one or two levels in whom conservative treatment was unsuccessful, and who had undergone surgery using IntraSPINE® were included. Inclusion diagnoses were: lumbar disc herniation (LDH), foraminal stenosis and facet joint syndrome. Non-inclusion criteria were: aged < 18>
Eligible patients with a diagnosis of DDD were informed about the study and, after providing written consent, each patient was enrolled. Patients were evaluated at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months postoperatively and all underwent a postoperative MRI.
Investigational Device:
The IntraSPINE® is a dynamic interlaminar device made of medical dimethyl siloxane and covered with pure polyethylene terephthalate. The front surface is coated with a silicone film to prevent the formation of adhesions in the region of the yellow ligament or dura mater [16,17] (Figure 1). The device is available in five sizes (8, 10, 12, 14 and 16 mm) for optimal accommodation of the interlaminar space. IntraSPINE® is CE marked (March 2007) and made of materials allowing it a permanent duration of use or contact with the body.
The implant is compressed within the interlaminar space resulting in an immediate stable interference-type fit. Soft tissue in- and on-growth further secures the implant over time.
Surgical Technique:
All the participating clinics performed comparable routine spine surgical procedures as described on the manufacturer’s guidelines. All operations were performed under general anesthesia in the prone position with appropriate positioning precautions and hips and knees flexed.
Implanting IntraSPINE® is performed according to the following technique: incision of the interspinous ligament, trying to preserve the supraspinatus ligament. The distractor provided is used to improve access to the interlaminar space. Metal trials that are also available in 5 sizes are used to accurately size the interlaminar space.
The selected implant is briefly immersed in saline and then compressed with a simple holder which narrows the cranio-caudal dimension of the implant to facilitate simple lateral insertion.
Data collection
All data were collected using Quanta view eCRF and the Evamed database. Baseline evaluations, including basic demographic data and employment status, were conducted before surgery. Disc degeneration was assessed using the Pfirrmann grading system.
Furthermore, surgical data were collected. Variables of interest including discharge disposition, length of stay and post-surgical complication were also obtained from patient’s charts and physician’s notes.
Assessments of disability status and pain
Disability functional assessment was measured using the Oswestry disability index (ODI)[18], both preoperatively and at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months of postoperative follow-up.
Low back and radicular pain were also assessed on a visual analogue scale (VAS)[19] at each visit on a horizontal 100-mm scale ranging from 0 mm, “no pain”, to 100 mm, “the worst pain imaginable”. Patients were not shown the records of their earlier assessments.
Success was achieved if postoperative improvement at month 36 in terms of ODI score was at least 30%, and in the absence of complications, including revision surgery (reoperation) at the treated level, removal of the implant, infection or re-herniation or any other adverse event related to surgery or the device.
Post-surgery and satisfaction data
Secondary measures included patient work status and return-to-work data. Other medical interventions, including medication use and physical therapy were collected. The Likert scale was used to assess the grade of satisfaction with current symptoms and with care (1: Not satisfied at all, 4: Very satisfied).
Complications
A systematic assessment of complications including infection, hematoma, deep venous thrombosis, vascular injury, was carried out. Moreover, surgeons were asked to record intraoperative complications such as cerebrospinal fluid leakage. Throughout the entire course of the study, information was also collected on Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) occurring at any time point. Recurrent lumbar disc herniation (at the operated level) was also taken into account. Recurrent herniation was confirmed using MRI and classified as either symptomatic re-herniation (painful and requiring surgery) or non-symptomatic re-herniation (confirmed by MRI but not requiring reintervention).
Statistical analysis
Data analyses were performed using SAS Version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC USA software). Data are presented as median and interquartile ranges (25th-75th percentiles) for continuous variables and number (percentage) for categorical variables.
To compare differences in longitudinal clinical score patterns over 36 months, a mixed-effect model ANCOVA with repeated measurements was performed, with adjustment for low back and radicular pain score and ODI score at baseline.
Safety data were described over the study period (number, seriousness, outcomes, and causal relationship with IntraSPINE® implant). Two-sided tests with type I error α = 0.05 were applied to all analyses.
A total of 231 patients were included in the study. Of these, 180 (78%) completed the study with an average follow-up of 2.7 years (Figure 2: Study flow chart).
Baseline characteristics of the 231 included patients are shown in Table 1. Median age was 49 years (Q1; Q3: 40; 61). The majority of patient being male (58.9%) and employed (62 %). A median work stoppage of 30 days (Q1; Q3: 30; 90) was prescribed for 71/139 (51 %) employed patients. Disc herniation was the most common reported diagnosis (63%).
About 83% of the patients had degenerative disc disease at a single level, with L4/5 being most commonly affected (59%).
Among patients, 59 (31%) were classified as Pfirrmann Grade II. Drug therapy before surgery was prescribed for 99 % of patients and 76 % had physical therapy.
We report a national multicenter observational prospective study on the effects of a novel interlaminar device, “IntraSPINE®”, in a cohort of patients presenting DDD.
Our study found that complications related to surgery or to the device were very few, with only four patients presenting intraoperative complications (spinal fluid leak) which were unrelated to specific use of IntraSPINE®. This is consistent with the results of Leeet al who reported no complications such as myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, cerebrovascular accident, acute renal failure, mortality, deep venous thrombosis, ileus or urinary tract infection[20].
It is widely accepted that lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD), as characterized by disc dehydration and loss of disc height, is one of the most common conditions associated with and predisposing to chronic low back pain [21,22].
Among options in treating symptomatic DDD, the inter-spinous devices ISD may be used to try and restrict painful motion.Inter-spinous space distraction may contribute to indirect decompression of the neural foramen and spinal canal but at the expense of lordosis. Theoretically, this enlarges the neural foramen in patients with spinal stenosis and neurogenic claudication [23]. However, inducing segmental kyphosis with any form of instrumentation would generally be considered a disadvantage and to be avoided. Also, a posteriorly placed interspinous implant is at a mechanical disadvantage in controlling abnormal flexion movement and is therefore less likely to be effective in ‘protecting’ the disc and reducing discogenic back pain.
The limitations of ISDs led to the development of the interlaminar device IntraSPINE® with its unique anterior positioning in the inter-laminar space [24] . IntraSPINE® provides both a fulcrum and support through the middle column of the spine, thereby contributing to the spine’s passive subsystem of stability. This unique positioning closer to the instant axis of rotation and nearer the sagittal axis of the facet joints allows the implant to more effectively off-load the facet joints in extension[13,20–26].
Also, an intact posterior tension band enables control of abnormal or excessive flexion movement, thereby ‘protecting’ the degenerate disc. In this way, IntraSPINE® has the potential to mitigate both facet and discogenic pain [24,27].
In this study, IntraSPINE® showed very good results, with an improvement in ODI score and in VAS back and leg pain scores during follow-up. The reduction in pain appeared to persist for two years, although scores increase slightly from 24 to 36 months, but nevertheless remained lower than baseline values. These results were also observed in the systematic review by Parker et al. in which the short-term and long-term incidence of recurrent back pain after primary single-level lumbar discectomy ranged from 3% to 34% and 5% to 36%, respectively[28] .
These results appear consistent with those in studies about ISD. Buric et al. showed that the outcomes after surgery using DIAM device were best between 6 and 24 months postoperatively followed by an increase in VAS scores from 24 to 48 months [29] . Despite this increase, VAS scores remained significantly lower than the baseline values. Considering these results, ILD could very well be proposed as an alternative to ISD.
The efficacy of this interlaminar device, in addition to standard microdiscectomy, in preventing recurrence of LBP has already been published[15]. The rationale for using this interlaminar device in conjunction with discectomy to reduce the incidence of post-discectomy back pain is the ability of the prosthesis to slow down disk-space collapse and control abnormal patterns of movement or micro-instability [30].
Our results show that 89% of active patients returned to work after surgery within an average of 3 months. Moreover, day case surgery was achieved in almost 3% of cases. Healthcare costs for LBP are increasing rapidly[31]. Direct and indirect costs of LBP associated with loss of earnings or changes in productivity are very high [32,33]. Hence, it is essential to develop treatments that are both clinically effective and, no less importantly, cost effective.
In this study, 16/146 (11%) of patients with disc herniation experienced symptomatic postoperative disc re-herniation. This result is consistent with the literature, which reports re-herniation rates of between 5 and 18% [34–36]. Regarding this aspect, since the IntraSPINE® maintains close to normal movement of the affected segment, it behaves just like a “normal” segment and thus with the same probability of recurrences. Although in theory IntraSPINE® has the potential to reduce disc re-herniation by abolishing excessive flexion movement and protecting the disc [37], a study in a significantly larger patient population is needed to achieve the requisite statistical power to provide proof. In addition, some experts are of the opinion that re-herniation occurred due to the relatively small size of the implants (8 mm), but this hypothesis remains to be confirmed too.
Regarding the further surgery, IntraSPINE® did not manage to rule out this factor. According to the experience of the surgeons who took part in the study, in the rare event that removal of the IntraSPINE® is necessary to gain access to the spinal canal, the device is easily removed without damaging the surrounding soft tissues, bone or dura mater. This is because IntraSPINE® is coated with a film of non-adherent silicone on the surface in contact with the dura mater or yellow ligament, effectively preventing the formation of adhesions to these layers.
The material composition of IntraSPINE®, comprising a silicone core and an outer shell reinforced by continuous wound PET fiber, is similar to ISP devices such as DIAM[29] or synthetic intervertebral disc prostheses [38]. According to the authors of the latter report, the combination of these materials represents a composite that mimics the architecture of the intervertebral disc and presents similar viscoelastic properties, making the device able to support/replace the function of the disc itself [38].
One limitation of our study was possible bias related to the fact that this was an observational study. The absence of a control group receiving standard care (surgery) without device insertion prevented us from confirming that the improvement in patient outcome post-operatively is related to the IntraSPINE® device alone. However, our results are consistent with the comparative study of Corriero et al. showing the absence of low back pain during the follow-up period in 74% of patients who received the IntraSPINE® implant, compared with only 41% of patients treated by simple stand-alone microdiscectomy who remained pain-free [15]. Moreover, numerous randomized studies assessing the efficacy of ISD found a significantly greater improvement in ODI score, as well as VAS back and leg pain scores, among patients with an ISD compared with those treated with stand-alone surgery[39,40]. These results suggest that the use of an implant may confer additional benefits over un-instrumented surgery in terms of patient outcome. Although some studies reports that Interspinous process decompression is still considered investigational and poor clinical results in the medical literature will continue to limit the appeal of these devices to many surgeons in the future [41]
Another limitation was that some patients would be inevitable lost to follow-up since this was a study with multiple follow-up appointments over three years, it. This potentially introduces a bias in the final analysis that could lead to under- or over-estimation of the outcomes following surgery. However, despite a long follow-up period, 78% of patients completed the study, which is relatively acceptable and reduces this potential bias [42].
Another limitation consists in the absence of radiological data. It would have been interesting to measure post-operative lordosis using standing X-rays to assess sagittal balance and segmental alignment following IntraSPINE® insertion. Previous radiological studies of IntraSPINE® devices suggest that the implant does not affect sagittal balance [24,43] and that it also maintains the biomechanics of the spine in an effective manner with slowing down or partial reversal of the natural progression of the degenerative cascade[26]. Radiological enlargement of the neural foramen has also been reported previously [23,24].
Supporting this, in vitro studies have shown that ISDs distract the posterior part of the functional spinal unit, reposition and unload the facet joints, and reduce intervertebral pressure, particularly on the posterior part of the disc [44].
In summary, the findings of this study are promising and demonstrate that successful patient outcomes can be achieved using the IntraSPINE® device for a range of degenerative diseases, with improvements in both back/leg pain and disability, sustained at 3 years. Implantation of the IntraSPINE® device was straightforward and there were no device-specific complications. Use of the IntraSPINE® in the treatment of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine has been evaluated and discussed in published papers.
The findings of this study coupled with other published research results suggest that IntraSPINE® may confer additional benefits in terms of back pain reduction and disability outcomes when used in conjunction with decompression or microdiscectomy in comparison to stand-alone decompressive procedures. A helpful future trial would single-blindly randomize the implantation of IntraSPINE® to patients undergoing a decompressive procedure so as to produce a matched control group. In addition, economic evaluation will be conducted in future trials to assess the cost effectiveness of using IntraSPINE®. The results of such follow-up trials are expected to establish a robust clinical basis for the effects of IntraSPINE® in this patient population.
This study was funded by Cousin Biotech. The funder had no role in the interpretation or reporting of results. One of the Author (FH) is employee of Cousin Biotech Company involved in the manufacture of a device examined in this study.
This study received a favorable opinion from ethical committee of Clinique d’Argonay.
D.C, C.V, L.M and M.L performed patient’s recruitment and data collection. N.W performed data monitoring. R.B, H.R, and O.Z. analysed the data. All authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript. R.B wrote the paper with input from all authors. C.A worked on the manuscript and correct it.
We are grateful for the contribution of Dr. José Manuel Cabezudo, Prof. Giancarlo Guizzardi and Prof. Gualtiero Innocenzi for their proofreading and commentary on this manuscript.
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.
