Proper heart’s nomenclature is very important in daily clinical practice and research studies, and when it is consistent, it can facilitate better communication between different medical specialists. The general rule of the anatomy is to describe organs and their structures in attitudinally correct position. However, the use of the old-fashioned Valentine position (where the heart is described as if it were standing on its apex) is still in use to describe important cardiac structures. Upon closer analysis, all main chambers of the heart and their associated subcomponents have mislabeled structures that should be renamed. In this article we aimed to emphasize the limitations of Valentinian nomenclature, present proper anatomical names of the most important heart’s structures and advocate to change certain mislabeled anatomical structures. Attitudinally correct designations presented in this study will benefit all medical specialties, and they will reinforce the importance of consistent orientational naming. Correct naming of heart’s structures will also help improve communication between different medical specialists.
The paper presents a prototype of a rehabilitation robot for lower extremities. It is created on the basis of cylindrical kinematic model, equipped with two rigid arms, special handles and fixtures. It has five active degrees of freedom and is designed to repeat the trajectories generated by physiotherapist during the learning phase. Presented prototype of rehabilitation robot has the ability to replay different types of trained exercises such as: hip and knee flexion/extension, leg abduction/adduction. The protection system (including overload detection) implemented in the robot ensures safe working with patients.
Two types of names for ‘Turkish delight’ are known in the Slavic languages: rahat-lokum ~ ratluk, and lokum. Even though most etymological dictionaries derive them from the same Arabo-Turkish etymon, their different structures are not discussed and the phonetic differences not explained. The aim of this paper is to establish the relative chronology of changes made to the original phrase, as well as to point out some problems which still remain more or less obscure.
en
pl
