Title: Comparison of rhythmic stabilization according to Kabat with the techniques used in practice. Objectives: The main aim of this thesis was to measure and compare the level of muscle activity and the level of cocontraction of Muscle quadratus lumborum sinister, obliquus internus abdominis sinister, rectus abdominis sinister and dexter obliquus externus abdominis, which were exposed to different stabilization techniques - rhythmic stabilization and technique used in practice - technique "pushing". Methods: This is an experimental study which is analyzed and then assessing the level of cocontraction of antagonists and the degree of muscle strength in two different ways- the technique of PNF and technique pushing. We use a surface electromyography as an objectification method. The sample consisted of 7 probands. Results: It was discovered that left side lying position not enlarged to the level of activity of all muscles required, therefore the muscles involved in PNF diagonals. Prerequisite increased level of activation during rhythmic stabilization technique according to Kabat was confirmed only in m. quadratus lumborum sinister and m. obliquus externus abdominis dexter and the values statistically insignificant. Participation of the rectus abdominis though its dominant and statistically...

Title: Comparison of rhythmic stabilization according to Kabat with the techniques used in practice. Objectives: The main aim of this thesis was to measure and compare the level of muscle activity and the level of cocontraction of Muscle quadratus lumborum sinister, obliquus internus abdominis sinister, rectus abdominis sinister and dexter obliquus externus abdominis, which were exposed to different stabilization techniques - rhythmic stabilization and technique used in practice - technique "shove". Methods: This is an experimental study which is analyzed and then assessing the level of cocontraction of antagonists and the degree of muscle strength in two different ways- the technique of PNF and technique pushing. We use a surface electromyography as an objectification method. The sample consisted of 7 probands. Results: It was discovered that left side lying position not enlarged to the level of activity of all muscles required, therefore the muscles involved in PNF diagonals. Prerequisite increased level of activation during rhythmic stabilization technique according to Kabat was confirmed only in m. quadratus lumborum sinister and m. obliquus externus abdominis dexter and the values statistically insignificant. Participation of the rectus abdominis though its dominant and statistically...

Le récepteur DcR3 (Decoy receptor 3) est un membre de la famille des récepteurs aux facteurs de nécrose tumorale (TNF). Il est fortement exprimé dans les tissus humains normaux ainsi que les tumeurs malignes. DcR3 est un récepteur pour trois ligands de la famille du TNF tels que FasL, LIGHT et TL1A. Étant une protéine soluble donc dépourvue de la portion transmembranaire et intracytoplasmique, le récepteur DcR3 est incapable d’effectuer une transduction de signal intracellulaire à la suite de son interaction avec ses ligands. De ce fait, DcR3 joue un rôle de compétiteur pour ces derniers, afin d’inhiber la signalisation via leurs récepteurs fonctionnels tels que Fas, HVEM/LTbetaR et DR3. Lors de nos précédentes études, nous avons pu démontrer, que DcR3 pouvaist moduler la fonction des cellules immunitaires, et aussi protéger la viabilité des îlots de Langerhans. À la suite de ces résultats, nous avons généré des souris DcR3 transgéniques (Tg) en utilisant le promoteur du gène β-actine humaine afin d’étudier plus amplement la fonction de ce récepteur. Les souris Tg DcR3 ont finalement développé le syndrome lupus-like (SLE) seulement après l’âge de 6 mois. Ces souris présentent une variété d'auto-anticorps comprenant des anticorps anti-noyaux et anti-ADN. Elles ont également manifesté des lésions rénales, cutanées, hépatiques et hématopoïétiques. Contrairement aux modèles de lupus murin lpr et gld, les souris DcR3 sont plus proche du SLE humain en terme de réponse immunitaire de type Th2 et de production d'anticorps d'anti-Sm. En péus, nous avons constaté que les cellules hématopoïétiques produisant DcR3 sont suffisantes pour causer ces pathologies. DcR3 peut agir en perturbant l’homéostasie des cellules T pour interférer avec la tolérance périphérique, et ainsi induire l'autoimmunité. Chez l'humain, nous avons détecté dans le sérum de patients SLE des niveaux élevés de la protéine DcR3. Chez certains patients, comme chez la souris, ces niveaux sont liés directement aux titres élevés d’IgE. Par conséquent, DcR3 peut représenter un facteur pathogénique important du SLE humain. L’étude des souris Tg DcR3, nous a permis aussi d’élucider le mécanisme de protection des îlots de Langerhans. Le blocage de la signalisation des ligands LIGHT et TL1A par DcR3 est impliqué dans une telle protection. D'ailleurs, nous avons identifié par ARN microarray quelques molécules en aval de cette interaction, qui peuvent jouer un rôle dans le mécanisme d’action. Nous avons par la suite confirmé que Adcyap1 et Bank1 joue un rôle critique dans la protection des îlots de Langerhans médiée par DcR3. Notre étude a ainsi élucidé le lien qui existe entre la signalisation apoptotique médiée par Fas/FasL et la pathogénèse du SLE humain. Donc, malgré l’absence de mutations génétiques sur Fas et FasL dans le cas de cette pathologie, DcR3 est capable de beoquer cette signalisation et provoquer le SLE chez l’humain. Ainsi, DcR3 peut simultanément interférer avec la signalisation des ligands LIGHT et TL1A et causer un phénotype plus complexe que les phénotypes résultant de la mutation de Fas ou de FasL chez certains patients. DcR3 peut également être utilisé comme paramètre diagnostique potentiel pour le SLE. Les découvertes du mécanisme de protection des îlots de Langerhans par DcR3 ouvrent la porte vers de nouveaux horizons afin d'explorer de nouvelles cibles thérapeutiques pour protéger la greffe d'îlots. / Decoy receptor 3 (DcR3) is a member of the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor family, and is widely expressed in human normal tissues and malignant tumors. It is a decoy receptor of three TNF family members, i.e., FasL, LIGHT and TL1A. The interaction of DcR3 and its ligands will not transmit signal into cells via DcR3 because DcR3 is a soluble protein without a transmembrane and intracellular segment. Thereby, DcR3 competitively inhibits signaling through three functional receptors, i.e., Fas, HVEM/LTbetaR and DR3. In previous studies, we found that DcR3 could modulate immune cell function, and protect islet viability. Herein, we generated DcR3 transgenic (Tg) mice driven by the human β-actin promoter to further investigate the function of DcR3. Interestingly, the DcR3 Tg mice developed a lupus-like syndrome at 6 months of age. They presented a variety of autoantibodies including anti-nucleus and anti-dsDNA antibodies. They also manifested renal, dermal, hepatic and hematopoietic lesions. Compared to lpr and gld mouse lupus models, DcR3 Tg mice more closely resembled human SLE in terms of Th2-biased immune response and anti-Sm antibody production. Furthermore, we found that DcR3-producing hematopoietic cell were sufficient to cause these pathological changes. Mechanistically, DcR3 may break T-cell homeostasis to interfere with peripheral tolerance, and then induce autoimmunity. In humans, we detected high DcR3 levels in SLE patient sera. The high DcR3 levels were related to elevated IgE titer in some SLE patients, as was the case in the mouse model. Therefore, DcR3 may represent an important pathogenetic factor of human SLE. Utilizing the DcR3 Tg mouse, we further elucidated the mechanism by which DcR3 protected islets from primary nonfunction (PNF). Blocking of LIGHT and TL1A signaling by DcR3 are involved in such protection. Moreover, by mRNA microarray we identified possible downstream molecules, which may mediate such protection. We confirmed that Adcyap1 and Bank1 played critical roles in mediating DcR3’s effect in islet protection. Our studies resolved a puzzle about the relationship between the Fas/FasL apoptosis signaling pathway and the pathogenesis of human SLE. DcR3 can block Fas/FasL pathway even if there is no genetic mutation in Fas and FasL. DcR3 can simultaneously interfere with LIGHT and TL1A signaling to cause a more complex phenotype than the simple Fas or FasL mutation in patients. DcR3 can also be employed as a potential diagnostic parameter for SLE. The discovery of the mechanism of DcR3 in protecting islets allows us to explore novel therapeutic targets to protect islet graft.

Axonal degeneration is a major pathological feature of the central nervous system (CNS) inflammatory demyelinating disease multiple sclerosis (MS). This axonal degeneration has major consequences, as functional axonal regeneration in the CNS is largely absent. Cumulative axonal degeneration is the likely cause of the majority of progressive MS-related disability, and therefore, the need for novel neuroprotective therapies for MS exists. Experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), an animal model of MS pathology, also produces axonal injury. In particular, the optic nerve and spinal cord are key sites of neuroinflammation in mouse EAE. By utilizing this model, the short term and long term effects of the putative neuroprotective cytokine, leukaemia inhibitory factor (LIF), were investigated in the optic nerve and spinal cord utilising a number of outcome measures of axonal dysfunction. These included MRI measures of water diffusivity along (ADC ||) and across (ADC┴) the optic nerves, serum levels of phosphorylated neurofilament heavy chain subunit (pNF-H) and histological morphometric measures. LIF treatment reduced EAE grade and pNF-H plasma levels, decreased ADC┴, but had no effect on ADC ||, axon counts or inflammatory infiltration. / In contrast, genetic deletion of LIF and its sister cytokine ciliary neurotrophic factor (CNTF), not only increased EAE grade and pNF-H levels, but also decreased optic nerve ADC|| and optic nerve and spinal cord axon densities. After reviewing current literature, we hypothesize that the target cell for endogenously upregulated LIF in EAE may be the neuron or axon, whereas the target cell for exogenously administered therapeutic LIF may be another cell type, possibly infiltrating macrophages and activated microglial cells. LIF antagonist treatment did not have any affect on EAE grade, pNF-H levels or MRI parameters. This lack of effect may be due to the inability of the LIF antagonist to enter the CNS, supporting the hypothesis that endogenous LIF has a centrally acting mechanism.