AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article
*Corresponding Author: Paula Veldhuis, Ethicon, Inc., 4545 Creek Rd., Cincinnati, OH 45242, USA.
Citation: Skipworth RJE, Alfieri S, Gersin K, Hopkins J, Alkhaffaf B, et. al, (2024), Safety and Performance of a Novel Tissue Sealer in Upper Gastrointestinal Procedures, J, Clinical Case Reports and Studies, et al, 5(8); DOI:10.31579/2690-8808/209
Copyright: ©, 2024, Paula Veldhuis. 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: 15 August 2024 | Accepted: 22 August 2024 | Published: 29 August 2024
Keywords: enseal x1 curved jaw tissue sealer; hemostasis; upper gastrointestinal surgery
Background: Hemostasis is essential for surgical success. Technological advancements have enhanced surgical practice with a wide range of energy devices available for sealing and/or cutting tissue and vessels, of which the advanced bipolar ENSEAL X1 Curved Jaw device (X1CJ) is one. This study examined usability and safety of X1CJ use in upper gastrointestinal (GI) procedures.
Methods: This prospective post-market study recruited subjects presenting for upper GI procedures. The patients were more than 18 years, primary procedure where at least one vessel was to be transected with X1CJ, provide informed consent were included. The study excluded the physical or psychological condition or concurrent enrollment in trial which could impact participation or endpoints. Primary performance endpoint was achievement of ≤ Grade 3 hemostasis for each vessel transected on a 4-point scale, with a grade of 4 indicating significant hemostatic intervention was required. Secondary performance endpoint was surgeon-rated scores for device usage. Safety endpoint was occurrence of adverse events (AEs) deemed device-related.
Results: 82 subjects (67.1% female) with a mean age of 53 years were studied. Procedures included cholecystectomy (34.1%), sleeve gastrectomy (18.3%), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (15.9%), fundoplication (9.8%), jejunectomy (9.8%), ileectomy (8.5%), and hiatal hernia repair/surgery (2.4%). Hemostasis was achieved in 100% of the patients. Of the total of 121 vessels transected, the bulk were designated as Grade 1 (90.9%), followed by Grade 2 (4.1%), and Grade 3 (5.0%). Zero vessels transected were Grade 4. Surgeons described overall satisfaction in their experiences utilizing the X1CJ. Only one patient (1.2%) experienced an AE (decreased hemoglobin) which was deemed by the surgeon as possibly related to the study device and no serious device-related AEs occurred.
Conclusion: Results from this study demonstrate the acceptable safety and usability of the X1CJ in specific upper GI procedures.
Efficient tissue and vessel sealing techniques in surgery are critical for the prevention of blood loss and ensuring optimal outcomes in open and minimally invasive surgeries (MIS). Hemostasis is essential for surgical success which decrease potential risks of post-operative complications associated with bleeding, reduce costs, and maintain surgical field visibility particularly during MIS procedures.[1] For example, in colorectal surgery, blood loss has been identified as an independent risk factor for postoperative adverse events, cancer recurrence, and poorer overall survival.[2] Despite being a relatively routinely performed procedure, two common intraoperative complications of Nissen Fundoplication remain hemorrhage and injuries to abdominal organs - both of which may lead to significant blood loss and again highlighting the need for an efficient sealing device.[3,4]
Engineering advances have revolutionized surgical practice such that surgeon’s now have a wide range of technologies available for cutting and/or sealing tissue and vessels. Historically, surgeons employed various methods for hemostasis, including both non-energy based (i.e., sutures, staples), and energy-based tools (comprised of traditional monopolar and bipolar electrosurgical devices, advanced bipolar sealing devices, and ultrasonic dissectors).[2,5] While it remains a surgeon’s preference on which technology to employ for any particular patient, energy devices are currently used in the majority of procedures.[6]
Advanced vessel-sealing systems include ultrasonic devices (such as Harmonic Shearsl; Ethicon, USA), advanced bipolar electrosurgical technology (such as LigaSure; Medtronic, USA), and combination devices (such as Thunderbeat; Olympus, Japan). These have been widely adopted in a number of specialties, including colorectal surgery, gynecology and urology for an array of procedures including proctectomy, colectomy, hysterectomy, splenectomy, and thyroidectomy. [2]
There are many clinical benefits achieved through the use of energy devices such as reduced operative time, less operative blood loss, and fewer post-operative complications than non-energy-based technologies.[2,7,8] Despite this, risks associated with tissue and vessel sealing still exist including concerns of blood loss and thermal injury.[6] The ENSEAL X1 Curved Jaw device (X1CJ) is an advanced bipolar surgical instrument for open or laparoscopic surgical procedures used to seal and transect vessels and lymphatics, as well as to cut, grasp and dissect tissue during surgery with its curved, tapered tip which enables dissection and easier access to hard-to-reach areas (Figure 1). This device has a 360° continuous shaft rotation enabling the surgeon to adjust the orientation of the device without changing hand position. Additionally, the diversity of function is increased by separating the actions of cutting and sealing, allowing for specific actions tailored to the particular situation. While there are some published data regarding the use of X1CJ, there is sparse literature currently available in upper gastrointestinal surgery. [9,10] Thus, we present results from a post-market approval study of real-world use of the X1CJ in upper gastrointestinal (GI) procedures.
Figure 1: ENSEAL X1 Curved Jaw Tissue Sealer Device and Generator 11
The objective of this single-arm, prospective, post-market approval multi-center study was to demonstrate acceptable performance and safety of the X1CJ, and accompanying Generator11 (GEN11) when utilized per its instructions for use. The study was conducted in the USA and Great Britain (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04763421). The first patient consented in April 2021 and the last subject visit occurred in September 2023. Ethics approvals were obtained from local review boards prior to study onset and the study was conducted in compliance with Good Clinical Practice and the Declaration of Helsinki, as well as any other applicable local regulatory requirements.
Our study recruited subjects presenting for upper gastrointestinal (GI) procedures in which the X1CJ was slated to be used. Inclusion criteria included: >18 years of age, primary open or laparoscopic procedure where at least one vessel was to be transected by the X1CJ, and a willingness to provide informed consent. Exclusion criteria were any condition which may potentially impair study participation, or enrollment in a concurrent trial which could impact study endpoints. All subjects provided informed consent. All procedures were performed using the individual institution’s standard of care. Proposed recruitment included up to 120 subjects.
2.1 Device and Indication
The ENSEAL X1 Curved Jaw Tissue Sealer (Product Codes: NSLX125C, NSLX137C, or NSLX145C) are advanced bipolar electrosurgical devices used to seal and cut, exclusively powered by the GEN11 (Ethicon, Inc., Cincinnati, OH) that has been previously described.[11]
2.2 Endpoints
The primary performance endpoint was achievement of intraoperative ≤ Grade 3 hemostasis for each vessel transection based upon Siegel et. al. [12]:
Grade 1: no bleeding at transection site
Grade 2: minor bleeding at transection site, no intervention required
Grade 3: minor bleeding at transection site, mild intervention required (i.e., compression, monopolar device and/or touch-ups)
Grade 4: significant bleeding (e.g., pulsatile blood flow, venous pooling) requiring intervention such as extensive coagulation or ligation with use of additional hemostatic measures.
Secondary performance endpoints were based on surgeon-rated scores for various device usages: adhesiolysis, lymphatics or tissue bundles divided, tissue grasping, tissue cutting, or tissue dissection. A Likert-like 5-point scale was utilized: very dissatisfied, dissatisfied, neither satisfied or dissatisfied, satisfied, or very satisfied. The hemostasis grade for each vessel transected was assessed and data was collected on additional products required to achieve hemostasis. The safety endpoint was assessed by occurrence of adverse events (AEs) deemed device-related.
2.3 Data Collection
Baseline data captured included demographic information (age, gender, race, and ethnicity), relevant medical and surgical history, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status score,[13] and indication and primary procedure performed. Additional variables were compiled, including: body mass index (BMI), procedure conducted and its duration, vessel transected (and surgeon-approximated size), estimated intraoperative blood loss, concomitant procedure performed, whether any other energy device was utilized in the primary or concomitant procedure, requirement (and number) of X1CJ touchups for Grade 3, and length of stay (LOS). A generator questionnaire regarding each investigator’s assessment of device functionality was completed after each case. Specifically, each surgeon was queried about their experience utilizing the GEN11 including its ease-of-use. Surgeon reported device-related AEs were captured over the course of the entire study period. A post-procedure follow-up visit occurred approximately 28 (±14) days to evaluate any further potential device-related AEs or primary procedure-related reoperations.
2.4 Statistics
The number and percentage of vessels where hemostasis was achieved (≤ Grade 3) were summarized and a 95% confidence interval estimated for each procedure. Counts and percentages were provided for type, size, and number of vessels transected, grading scale distribution for all vessels transected, number of times X1CJ touch-ups were required, and the need for additional measures to obtain hemostasis on vessels (i.e., other advanced energy devices or hemostatic measures). Further, a summary of AEs and Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) was performed by procedure and sub-procedure group.
A total of 82 subjects (55 females, 27 males) with a mean age of 53 years (20-84 range) and a mean body mass index of 33.0 ± 11.2 kg/m2 were included in this study. The majority of the subjects had ASA physical status of II and III scores (46.3% and 42.7%, respectively) and had never smoked (73.2%). Baseline data are presented in Table 1. Subjects presented for cholecystectomy (34.1%) sleeve gastrectomy (18.3%), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (15.9%), fundoplication (9.8%), jejunectomy (9.8%), ileectomy (8.5%), hiatal hernia repair/surgery (2.4%), and other (1.2%), Table 2. The majority of cases were performed laparoscopically (85.4%) with one conversion to open (1.4%).
Vessel skeletonization occurred in 39 patients (47.6%). Standard of care prophylactic use of sutures or clips prior to vessel transection was reported in 11.0% of the cases. There was fibrotic tissue (3.7%), inflamed tissue/vessels (4.9%) and adhesions (39.0%) observed but no atherosclerotic tissue or calcified tissues/vessels reported. The overall mean procedure duration was 2.12 hours (0.5 – 10.1 range).
| Measure | Values |
| Total # of subjects | 82 |
| Age at consent (years) | |
| Mean ± SD [Median] | 52.56 ± 17.2 [52.0] |
| Range | 20.0; 84.0 |
| Sex, n (%) | |
| Female | 55 (67.1%) |
| Male | 27 (32.9%) |
| Ethnicity, n (%) | |
| Hispanic or Latino | 1 (1.2%) |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 76 (92.7%) |
| Not reported | 5 (6.1%) |
| Race, n (%) | |
| Black or African American | 6 (7.4%) |
| White | 72 (88.9%) |
| Not reported | 3 (3.7%) |
| Body Mass Index (kg/m2) | |
| Mean ± SD [Median] | 33.00 ± 11.21 [28.90] |
| Range | 17.8; 59.0 |
| ASA, n (%) | |
| I | 8 (9.8%) |
| II | 38 (46.3%) |
| III | 35 (42.7%) |
| IV | 1 (1.2%) |
| V | 0 |
| Smoking Status, n (%) | |
| Current Smoker | 7 (8.5%) |
| Former Smoker | 15 (18.3%) |
| Never Smoked | 60 (73.2%) |
Table 1: Baseline Characteristics of Subjects
| Total # subjects | 82 |
| Surgical Approach | |
| Laparoscopic | 70/82 (85.4%) |
| Open | 12/82 (14.6%) |
| Conversion to Open | 1/69 (1.4%) |
| Fundoplication | 8 (9.8%) |
| Hiatal hernia repair | 2 (2.4%) |
| Cholecystectomy | 28 (34.1%) |
| Sleeve gastrectomy | 15 (18.3%) |
| Roux-en-Y gastric bypass | 13 (15.9%) |
| Jejunectomy | 8 (9.8%) |
| Ileectomy | 7 (8.5%) |
| Other | 1 (1.2%) |
Table 2: Specifics Related to the Procedure Performed
Of the 121 total vessels transected, surgeons indicated the majority of vessels were 3-5 mm (77.7%); 19.8 % being designated < 3 mm; and 2.5% >5-7 mm. On the hemostasis grading scale, the bulk were designated as Grade 1 (90.9%), followed by Grade 2 (4.1%), Grade 3 (5.0%) and none as Grade 4 (Table 3). Of the 6 vessels transected as Grade 3, mild compression was used on 5 with touch-ups utilizing the X1CJ device being done on them all. Successful hemostasis, defined as Grade 3 or lower, was achieved on 100% of vessels. Mean estimated intraoperative blood loss was 60 mL (range 0.0; 500.0) with zero subjects requiring blood transfusion. The X1CJ was not utilized in any of the concomitant procedures which occurred in 15.9% of the patients. Length of stay was 3.74 days (range 0.0; 47.0) with one subject being released outside of the 30-day follow-up period.
| Total | 121 |
| Vessel Size: | |
| 3 to 5 mm | 94 (77.7%) |
| <3> | 24 (19.8%) |
| >5 to 7 mm | 3 (2.5%) |
| Hemostasis Grading Scale: | |
| Grade 1 | 110 (90.9%) |
| Grade 2 | 5 (4.1%) |
| Grade 3 | 6 (5.0%) |
| Grade 4 | 0 |
Table 3: Vessel Transection Summary
A total of nine surgeons participated in the study and described overall satisfaction with experiences utilizing the X1CJ. The device was used for adhesions 30 (36.6%), lymphatics 6 (7.3%), tissue grasping 30 (36.6%), tissue cutting 35 (42.7%), and tissue dissection 49 (59.8%). Surgeons graded their experience based on a Likert-like scale and reported 100% satisfied/completely satisfied with the use of the device for removal or division of adhesions. Similarly, 83.4% of responses showed surgeons were satisfied/very satisfied when dividing lymphatic bundles. In terms of tissue cutting, 85.7% of surgeons were satisfied/very satisfied, while 98.0% were satisfied/very satisfied with dissection. The majority of surgeons reported strong agreement that the GEN11 operated as intended (92.7%). Surgeons strongly agreed that the touchscreen allowed for easy set-up and operation (91.5%). An additional survey was completed by surgeons as soon after they had completed their second procedure. These surgeons reported experiencing less hand fatigue compared to any previous advanced bipolar device used (66.7%), reduced need for instrument changes during surgery (77.8%), and overall felt that in critical cases, the X1CJ performed better than previous device used (66.6%) (Table 4).
One patient (1.2%) experienced an AE which was deemed as possibly related to the study device. This AE, which was deemed mild, was a decreased hemoglobin level and remained unresolved to the end of the study period.
| Measure | Value |
| Full Analysis Set | 82 |
| X1CJ Results | |
| Number of adhesions removed or divided by X1CJ | 30/82 (36.6%) |
| Percent satisfied with the adhesion removal or division by X1CJ | 30/30 (100.0%) |
| Number of lymphatics bundles divided by X1CJ | 6/76 (7.3%) |
| Percent satisfied with lymphatics bundles division by X1CJ | 5 (83.4%) |
| Number of tissue bundles divided by X1CJ | 23/82 (28%) |
| Percent satisfied with tissue bundles division by X1CJ | 22/23 (95.7%) |
| Number of times X1CJ used for tissue grasping | 30/82 (36.6%) |
| Percent satisfied were you with the tissue grasping by X1CJ | 24/30 (80.0%) |
| Number of times X1CJ used for tissue cutting | 35/82 (42.7%) |
| Percent satisfied were you with the tissue cutting by X1CJ | 30/35 (85.7%) |
| Number of times X1CJ used for tissue dissection | 49/82 (59.8%) |
| Percent satisfied were you with the tissue dissecting by X1CJ | 48/49 (97.9%) |
| Number of times any other energy device (monopolar, traditional bipolar, advanced bipolar, ultrasonic) was used during the primary procedure | 45/82 (54.9%) |
| Type of any energy device used: | |
| Monopolar | 27 (60.0%) |
| Advanced Bipolar | 4 (8.9%) |
| Ultrasonic | 14 (31.1%) |
| GEN11 Results | |
| Software Version Used | |
| 2016-1.1 | 59 (72.0%) |
| Other | 23 (28.%) |
| Number of times generator-related alarms occurred | 2/82 (2.4%) |
| Number of times generator performed as intended | 80/82 (97.6%) |
| Percent times the touchscreen allowed for easy set-up and operation | 79/82 (96.4%) |
| Surgeon Experience Survey* | |
| N | 9 |
| Type of advanced bipolar device previously used: | |
| None | 1/9 (11.1%) |
| ENSEAL G2 Curved and Straight Tissue Sealer | 2/9 (22.2%) |
| Ligasure Maryland | 4/9 (44.4%) |
| Thunderbeat | 1/9 (11.1%) |
| Other | 3/9 (33.3%) |
| I found that overall the X1CJ performed better than my previous device on critical tasks | 6/9 (66.6%) |
| I experienced less fatigue with X1CJ compared to previous device | 6/9 (66.7%) |
| I found the cut and seal buttons were easily distinguishable on the X1CJ | 7/9 (77.7%) |
| I found the cut and seal buttons were easily distinguishable on the X1CJ | 7/9 (77.7%) |
| I found the X1CJ reduced number of instrument changes compared to previous device | 7/9 (77.8%) |
| I found the X1CJ was easier to use compared to my previous device | 5/9 (55.5%) |
*This survey was completed as soon as they had completed their second procedure
Table 4: X1CJ and GEN11 Usability Survey Results
The adoption of advanced bipolar energy demonstrably reduces operative times, improves patient outcomes, and has shown an improvement in cost effectiveness in certain procedures. [14-16] Given the rapid introduction of novel surgical technologies, post-market analysis programs are crucial for ensuring patient safety. Hemorrhage is a well-documented complication, which we evaluated by a hemostasis grade achieved using this new advanced bipolar energy technology. This clinically relevant hemostasis model was similarly used in several post-market surveillance studies as well as an effectiveness and usability study. [11,12,17]
Specifically, post market surveillance on similar ENSEAL X1 products have shown satisfactory hemostasis in different types of colectomies, gynecological, and thoracic procedures.[17] However, upper GI procedures are lacking in similar surveillance. This study reports on the use of the X1CJ in several of the most commonly performed upper GI procedures. Similar outcomes to a prior real-world post-market surveillance study for a similar device, the ENSEAL X1 Large Jaw Tissue Sealer. When used on the enteral system, 100% hemostasis was achieved on all vessels transected (and all procedures performed) as Grade 3 and below hemostasis.[17] Similarly, our study showed that 100% of vessels transected with the X1CJ achieved hemostasis at Grade 3 and below. The majority were Grade 1 with no intraoperative bleeding occurring.
One long-standing benefit of advanced bipolar devices is their ability to seal vessels that are greater than 2 mm and including 7 mm. [18,19]. In the current study, 77% of vessels sealed were 3-5 mm with 2.5% were 5-7mm, which is consistent with predicate device usage. In our study, one patient was reported to have a low hemoglobin level post procedure. This event was deemed to be possibly device-related. No other adverse events were reported deemed related to device usage throughout study.
Research in advanced bipolar devices has resulted in the rapid evolution of new product designs. For example, curved jaw devices with tapered tips were engineered for tissue dissection and manipulation, adaptable energy modulation for temperature control to reduce lateral thermal spread, and separated functions to cut and seal. The initial effectiveness and usability study performed on in-vivo porcine models, showed that 100% of surgeons deemed the X1CJ as acceptable for hemostasis, dissection, transection and tissue manipulation.[11] In clinical application, of the 60% of surgeons in this cohort who utilized X1CJ for dissection, 97% were satisfied/very satisfied with usage for this purpose. Adhesiolysis was performed by 37% of surgeons and of those, 100% were satisfied/very satisfied. Tissue cutting was heavily utilized as well with 85 % being satisfied/very satisfied. Generally, surgeons described overall satisfaction with their utilization of X1CJ with 66.6% reporting that on critical tasks, they were confident the X1CJ performed in a superior manner to their previous device. Surgeons reported that GEN11 functioned as intended. Specifically, surgeons described its ease-of-use and simple set-up as benefits.
One limitation of this study was the sample size which was a small observational cohort.
Our study aimed to provide real-world insights into the safety and usability of the X1CJ device. The X1CJ continued to demonstrate effectiveness and safety in the upper gastrointestinal procedures presented in this study. Additionally, surgeons reported the device functioned satisfactorily as designed based on its real-world application.
Institutional Review Board or Ethics Committee approvals were obtained prior to study onset in the US (#IRB00083466), UK (#20/LO/1135), and Italy (#3608).
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
