Pirogoff Amputation with a Disappointing Outcome: A Case Report

Review Data

Purpose and Significance of Study: The manuscript depicts the case of a 53-year-old motorcyclist who underwent Pirogoff amputation for extensive foot injury but failed to attain the desired outcome. This case deserves to be reported in order to underline the dearth of adequately informative studies which can guide the decision of undergoing this kind of amputation. 

 

Fit with Scope of Journal: The manuscript is of very high interest for the journal Surgical Case Reports.  

 

Several minor changes (already corrected in the galley proof) are required in the text. The common errors noted are – 

·       Omission of “the”, e.g. in the 3^rd sentence of the Conclusion section of Abstract, before “disadvantages” and “incorporation”, in the last sentence, before “literature” and so on. 

·       Omission of “,”, e.g. in the 2^nd sentence of the Results section of Abstract, after “Subsequently”, in the last sentence of the Conclusion section of Abstract, after “currently” and so on. 

·       “Hindfoot” must be spelled as a single word. 

·       “Afterwards” must be replaced by “afterward” in all the places. 

·       “Weight bearing” must be replaced by “weight-bearing”. 

·       “Decision-making” must be spelled with a hyphen. 

 

o   The other errors are listed below – 

In the Abstract section –  

  In Case Presentation – 

·       In the 1^st sentence, “a” before “trauma” must be removed and “an” must be inserted before “extensive”. 

  In Conclusion – 

·       In the 1^st sentence, “,” must be removed. 

·       In the 2^nd second sentence, “a” must be inserted before “major” and “include” must be replaced by “is”. 

In the Introduction section – 

  In the 1^st paragraph – 

·       In the 1^st sentence, “that” must be replaced by “where the foot”. 

  In the 3^rd paragraph – 

·       In the 1^st and 2^nd sentences, “will” must be removed. 

In the Case Report section – 

  In the 2^nd paragraph – 

·       In the 2^nd sentence, “vacuum assisted” must be hyphenated. 

·       In the last sentence, “,” must be removed. 

  In the 3^rd paragraph – 

·       In the 3^rd sentence, “adequate” must be replaced by “proper”. 

In the Discussion section –  

  In the 5^th paragraph – 

·       In the 1^st sentence, “qualitative good” must be replaced by “good qualitative”. 

In the Conclusion section – 

·       In the 4^th sentence, “patient” must be replaced by “patients”.  

Author Info

Annelies van der Vegt Joannes H.B. Geertzen Maria A. Paping

Corresponding Author

Annelies van der Vegt
University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Groningen, The Netherlands

Article Info

Article Type

Case Report

Publication history

Received: Tue 14, Jan 2020
Accepted: Fri 31, Jan 2020
Published: Fri 07, Feb 2020

Copyright

© 2023 Annelies van der Vegt. 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. Hosting by Science Repository.
DOI: 10.31487/j.SCR.2020.02.01