Complex continuous wavelet transforms are used to study the dynamics of instantaneous phase difference Δφ between the fluctuations of arterial blood pressure (ABP) and cerebral blood flow velocity (CBFV) in a middle cerebral artery. For healthy individuals, this phase difference changes slowly over time and has an almost uniform distribution for the very low-frequency (0.02–0.07 Hz) part of the spectrum. We quantify phase dynamics with the help of the synchronization index γ = 〈sinΔφ〉² + 〈cosΔφ〉²that may vary between 0 (uniform distribution of phase differences, so the time series are statistically independent of one another) and 1 (phase locking of ABP and CBFV, so the former drives the latter). For healthy individuals, the group-averaged index γ has two distinct peaks, one at 0.11 Hz [γ = 0.59 ± 0.09] and another at 0.33 Hz (γ = 0.55 ± 0.17). In the very low-frequency range (0.02–0.07 Hz), phase difference variability is an inherent property of an intact autoregulation system. Consequently, the average value of the synchronization parameter in this part of the spectrum is equal to 0.13 ± 0.03. The phase difference variability sheds new light on the nature of cerebral hemodynamics, which so far has been predominantly characterized with the help of the high-pass filter model. In this intrinsically stationary approach, based on the transfer function formalism, the efficient autoregulation is associated with the positive phase shift between oscillations of CBFV and ABP. However, the method is applicable only in the part of the spectrum (0.1–0.3 Hz) where the coherence of these signals is high. We point out that synchrony analysis through the use of wavelet transforms is more general and allows us to study nonstationary aspects of cerebral hemodynamics in the very low-frequency range where the physiological significance of autoregulation is most strongly pronounced.

Validation of a translated, culturally adapted questionnaire. To translate and culturally adapt a Polish version of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and to validate its use in Polish patients. The ODI is among the most popular questionnaires used to evaluate back pain-related disability. To our knowledge no validated Polish version of the index was available at the time our study was initiated. The questionnaire was translated and culturally adapted by 2 independent translators and approved by expert committee. Final version was included in the booklet consisting in addition of a previously validated Roland-Morris disability questionnaire, VAS for low back and leg and 3 Likert scale questions (pain medications, pain frequency, disability). It was tested on 169 patients with chronic low back pain, 164 (97%) of them were enrolled, and 84 of 164 (53%) returned the completed retest booklet within 2 to 14 days after the baseline test. There were no differences between the 2 groups in demographic and clinical parameters. Test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity were investigated. The mean ODI (standard deviation [SD]) was 48.45 (18.94); minimum 2, maximum 94. The Cronbach α for baseline questionnaires (n = 164) was 0.90. Concurrent validity, measured by comparing ODI responses with the results of the Roland-Morris disability questionnaire score was very good (r = 0.607, P < 0.001). The correlation with VAS back was fair (r = 0.37, P < 0.001) and with VAS leg was good (r = 0.56, P < 0.001). The tested ODI had excellent test-retest reliability, the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.97 and standard error of measurements was 3.54, the resulting minimal detectable changes at the 95% confidence level was 10. The results of this study indicate that the Polish version of the ODI is a reliable and valid instrument for the measurement of disability in Polish-speaking patients with lower back pain.

Objectives: Cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) has become an alternative treatment for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. This technique preserves appropriate motion at both the index and adjacent disc levels and consequently may prevent adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). The authors performed a meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of CDA to those of the gold standard, anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Both surgical and clinical parameters were employed to verify the hypothesis that CDA can reduce the risk of ASD. Methods: The meta-analysis comprised high-quality randomized controlled trials that compared CDA and ACDF treatments of cervical degenerative disc disease. Included papers reported data for at least one of the following outcomes: 1) surgical parameters, 2) questionnaire clinical indices (pre- and postoperative values), and 3) complication rates at 24 months; in addition, for ASD we analyzed 60 month or longer follow-ups. We used mean differences (MDs) or ORs to compare treatment effects between CDA and ACDF. Results: Twenty studies with 3,656 patients (2,140 with CDA and 1,516 with ACDF) met the inclusion criteria. CDA surgery, with mean duration longer than that of ACDF, was associated with higher blood loss. Visual analog scale neck pain score was significantly smaller for CDA (mean difference =-2.30, 95% CI [-3.72; -0.87], P=0.002). The frequency of dysphagia/dysphonia (OR =0.69, 95% CI [0.49; 0.98], P=0.04) as well as the long-term ASD rate for CDA was significantly smaller (OR =0.33, 95% CI [0.21; 0.50], P<0.0001). Conclusion: A significantly lower probability of ASD reoperations in the CDA cohort after a 60-month or longer follow-up was the most important finding of this study. Despite the moderate quality of this evidence, the pooled data corroborated for the very first time that CDA was efficacious in preventing ASD.

Some publications suggest a strong correlation between the intracranial pressure and the intraocular pressure. Other studies claim no correlation between these two physiologic variables. Our aim was to study whether the tonometry could be a useful method to evaluate intracranial pressure in patients with suspected intracranial abnormality. We evaluated the correlation between the intracranial pressure and the intraocular pressure, the intracranial pressure and the mean arterial pressure, and the intraocular pressure and the mean arterial pressure in 22 patients, initially comatose, who were admitted to our hospital. All patients required the intracranial pressure monitoring on clinical grounds. Simultaneous measurements were performed and recorded. We calculated both the linear correlation coefficient and the Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient. We found significant correlation between the intraocular pressure and the mean arterial pressure in 12 patients; however, significant correlation between the intraocular pressure and the intracranial pressure was found in only 2 patients. Tonometry is not an appropriate method for the assessment of intracranial pressure increases.