Our findings indicate that food elimination based on IgG antibodies in migraine patients who suffer from concomitant IBS may effectively reduce symptoms from both disorders with possible positive impact on the quality of life of the patients as well as potential savings to the health-care system.

Introduction Headache is a frequent adverse event after viral vaccines. We aimed to investigate the frequency and clinical associations of COVID-19 vaccine-related headache. Methods The characteristics, associations of this headache, main comorbidities, headache history following the influenza vaccine and during COVID-19 were investigated using a web-based questionnaire. Results A total of 1819 healthcare personnel (mean age: 44.4 ± 13.4 years, 1222 females), vaccinated with inactivated virus, contributed to the survey; 209 (11.4%) had been infected with COVID-19. A total of 556 participants (30.6%) reported headache with significant female dominance (36.1% vs. 19.3%), 1.8 ± 3.5 (median: 1; IQR: 0–2) days following vaccination. One hundred and forty-four participants (25.9%) experienced headache lasting ≥3 days. Headache was mostly bilateral without accompanying phenomena, less severe, and shorter than COVID-19-related headache. The presence of primary headaches and migraine were significantly associated with COVID-19 vaccine-related headache (ORs = 2.16 [95% CI 1.74–2.68] and 1.65 [1.24–2.19], respectively). Headache during COVID-19 or following influenza vaccine also showed significant association with headache following COVID-19 vaccine (OR = 4.3 [95% CI 1.82–10.2] and OR = 4.84 [95% CI 2.84–8.23], respectively). Only thyroid diseases showed a significant association (OR = 1.54 [95% CI 1.15–2.08]) with vaccine-related headache among the common comorbidities. Conclusion Headache is observed in 30.6% of the healthcare workers following COVID-19 vaccine and mostly experienced by females with pre-existing primary headaches, thyroid disorders, headache during COVID-19, or headache related to the influenza vaccine.

Study Design. Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. Objective. To report the follow-up curve behaviors in different Sanders staging groups. Summary of Background Data. Vertebral body tethering (VBT) is a growth modulation technique that allows gradual spontaneous follow-up curve correction as the patient grows. There is a lack of scientific evidence regarding appropriate patient selection and timing of implantation. Methods. Patients were grouped into five as: Sanders 1, 2, 3, 4–5, and 6–7. Data were collected preoperatively, at the day before discharge, and at each follow-up. Outcome measures were pulmonary and mechanical complications, readmission, and reoperation rates. Demographic, perioperative, clinical, radiographic, and complication data were compared using Fisher–Freeman–Halton exact tests for categorical variables and Kruskal-Wallis tests for the continuous variables. Results. Thirty-one (29 F, 2 M) consecutive patients with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up were included. The mean age at surgery was 12.1 (10–14). The mean follow-up was 27.1 (12–62) months. The mean preoperative main thoracic curve magnitude was 47° ± 7.6°. For all curves, preoperative and first erect curve magnitudes, bending flexibility, and operative correction percentages were similar between groups (for all comparisons, P > 0.05). The median height gained during follow-up was different between groups (P < 0.001), which was reflected into median curve correction during follow-up. Total curve correction percentage was different between groups (P = 0.009). Four (12.9%) patients had pulmonary and six (19.4%) had mechanical complications. One (3.2%) patient required readmission and two (6.5%) required reoperation. Occurrence of pulmonary complications was similar in Sanders groups (P = 0.804), while mechanical complications and overcorrection was significantly higher in Sanders 2 patients (P = 0.002 and P = 0.018). Conclusion. Follow-up curve behavior after VBT is different in patients having different Sanders stages. Sanders 2 patients experienced more overcorrection, thus timing and/or correction should be adjusted, since Sanders 3, 4, and 5 patients displayed a lesser risk of mechanical complications. Level of Evidence: 3.