Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation stretching - Mechanisms and clinical implications

Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) stretching techniques are commonly used in the athletic and clinical environments to enhance both active and passive range of motion (ROM) with a view to optimising motor performance and rehabilitation. PNF stretching is positioned in the literature as the most effective stretching technique when the aim is to increase ROM, particularly in respect to short-term changes in ROM. With due consideration of the heterogeneity across the applied PNF stretching research, a summary of the findings suggests that an 'active' PNF stretching technique achieves the greatest gains in ROM, e.g. utilising a shortening contraction of the opposing muscle to place the target muscle on stretch, followed by a static contraction of the target muscle. The inclusion of a shortening contraction of the opposing muscle appears to have the greatest impact on enhancing ROM. When including a static contraction of the target muscle, this needs to be held for approximately 3 seconds at no more than 20% of a maximum voluntary contraction. The greatest changes in ROM generally occur after the first repetition and in order to achieve more lasting changes in ROM, PNF stretching needs to be performed once or twice per week. The superior changes in ROM that PNF stretching often produces compared with other stretching techniques has traditionally been attributed to autogenic and/or reciprocal inhibition, although the literature does not support this hypothesis. Instead, and in the absence of a biomechanical explanation, the contemporary view proposes that PNF stretching influences the point at which stretch is perceived or tolerated. The mechanism(s) underpinning the change in stretch perception or tolerance are not known, although pain modulation has been suggested.

Genes and gene expression in the brains of human alcoholics

Chronic alcohol misuse by human subjects leads to neuronal loss in regions such as the superior frontal cortex (SFC). Propensity to alcoholism is associated with several genes. γ-Aminobutyric acid (GABA)A receptor expression differs between alcoholics and controls, whereas glutamate receptor differences are muted. We determined whether genotype differentiated the regional presentation of GABAA and glutamate-NMDA (N-methyl-d-aspartate) receptors in SFC. Autopsy tissue was obtained from alcoholics without comorbid disease, alcoholics with liver cirrhosis, and matched controls. ADH1C, DRD2B, EAAT2, and APOE genotypes modulated GABAA-β subunit protein expression in SFC toward a less-effective form of the receptor. Most genotypes did not divide alcoholics and controls on glutamate-NMDA receptor pharmacology, although gender and cirrhosis did. Genotype may affect amino acid transmission locally to influence neuronal vulnerability.

Comorbidity and genotype modify receptor expression in human alcoholics

Chronic alcohol misuse leads to both widespread and localized damage in human cerebral cortex. The latter, as neuronal loss, is marked in superior frontal cortex (SFC) but milder in primary motor cortex (PMC) and elsewhere. Quantitative morphometry by Harper et al showed that neuronal loss is greater in alcoholics with comorbidity (Wernicke Korsakoff syndrome, liver cirrhosis). Previous work revealed a paradox: the marked differences in GABAA receptor density, pharmacology, and expression between alcoholics without cormorbidity and controls are muted or absent in cirrhotic alcoholics. This concurs with work by the Butterworth group on hepatic encephalopathy cases — most of whom had an alcoholic ætiology — who show only minor differences from controls. Glutamate receptor differences are muted in many autopsy studies, though we have evidence that NMDA site pharmacology may vary in cirrhotic alcoholics. Here we used Real-Time PCR normalized to GAPDH deltaCT to quantify NMDA NR1, NR2A and NR2B subunit expression in SFC and PMC samples obtained at autopsy from alcoholics with and without comorbid cirrhosis and matched controls. Overall subunit transcript expression was signifi cantly lower in alcoholic cirrhotics than in either of the other groups (F2,42 = 12.942, P < 0.001). The effect was most marked for the NR1 subunit; males differed from females, particularly in SFC. The data suggest that if excitotoxicity mediates neuronal loss in SFC, it may be implemented differently: passively in uncomplicated alcoholics, by altered GABAergic transmission; actively in cirrhotic alcoholics, by altered glutamatergic transmission. We also subdivided cases on a panel of genetic markers. Different genotypes interacted with NMDA and GABAA pharmacology and expression. Cirrhotic and uncomplicated alcoholics may differ pathogenically because of inherent characteristics in addition to possible neurotoxic sequelæ to the liver damage.

Microarray and proteomic analysis of the human alcoholic brain

The superior frontal cortex (SFC) is selectively damaged in chronic alcohol abuse, with localized neuronal loss and tissue atrophy. Regions such as motor cortex show little neuronal loss except in severe co-morbidity (liver cirrhosis or WKS). Altered gene expression was found in microarray comparisons of alcoholic and control SFC samples [1]. We used Western blots and proteomic analysis to identify the proteins that also show differential expression. Tissue was obtained at autopsy under informed, written consent from uncomplicated alcoholics and age- and sex-matched controls. Alcoholics had consumed 80 g ethanol/day chronically (often, 200 g/day for 20 y). Controls either abstained or were social drinkers ( 20 g/day). All subjects had pathological confirmation of liver and brain diagnosis; none had been polydrug abusers. Samples were homogenized in water and clarified by brief centrifugation (1000g, 3 min) before storage at –80°C. For proteomics the thawed suspensions were centrifuged (15000g, 50 min) to prepare soluble fractions. Aliquots were pooled from SFC samples from the 5 chronic alcoholics and 5 matched controls used in the previous microarray study [1]. 2-Dimensional electrophoresis was performed in triplicate using 18 cm format pH 4–7 and pH 6–11 immobilized pH gradients for firstdimension isoelectric focusing. Following second-dimension SDS-PAGE the proteins were fluorescently stained and the images collected by densitometry. 182 proteins differed by 2-fold between cases and controls. 141 showed lower expression in alcoholics, 33 higher, and 8 were new or had disappeared. To date 63 proteins have been identified using MALDI-MS and MS-MS. Western blots were performed on uncentrifuged individual samples from 76 subjects (controls, uncomplicated alcoholics and cirrhotic alcoholics). A common standard was run on every gel. After transfer, immunolabeling, and densitometry, the intensities of the unknown bands were compared to those of the standards. We focused on proteins from transcripts that showed clear differences in a series of microarray studies, classified into common sets including Regulators of G-protein Signaling and Myelin-associated proteins. The preponderantly lower level of differentially expressed proteins in alcoholics parallels the microarray mRNA analysis in the same samples. We found that mRNA and protein expression do not frequently correspond; this may help identify pathogenic processes acting at the level of transcription, translation, or post-translationally.