Usage Information
Citation Information: JCI Insight. 2018;3(2):e96591. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.96591.
Abstract
Several imaging modalities have been used to assess lymphatic function, including fluorescence microscopy, near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF) imaging, and Doppler optical coherence tomography (DOCT). They vary in how the mouse is positioned, the invasiveness of the experimental setup, and the volume of contrast agent injected. Here, we present how each of these experimental parameters affects functional measurements of collecting lymphatic vessels. First, fluorescence microscopy showed that supine mice have a statistically lower contraction frequency compared with mice sitting upright. To assess the effect of different injection volumes on these endpoints, mice were injected with 4, 10, or 20 μl of dye. The lowest frequencies were observed after 20-μl injections. Interestingly, lymph-flow DOCT revealed that although there was lower contraction frequency in mice injected with 20 μl versus 4 μl, mice showed a higher volumetric flow with a 20-μl injection. This indicates that contraction frequency alone is not sufficient to understand lymphatic transport. Finally, NIRF revealed that removing the skin reduced contraction frequency. Therefore, this study reveals how sensitive these techniques are to mouse position, removal of skin, and dye volume. Care should be taken when comparing results obtained under different experimental conditions.
Authors
Echoe M. Bouta, Cedric Blatter, Thomas A. Ruggieri, Eelco F.J. Meijer, Lance L. Munn, Benjamin J. Vakoc, Timothy P. Padera
Usage data is cumulative from December 2023 through December 2024.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 221 | 51 |
| 48 | 31 | |
| Figure | 85 | 3 |
| Table | 26 | 0 |
| Supplemental data | 122 | 2 |
| Citation downloads | 37 | 0 |
| Totals | 539 | 87 |
| Total Views | 626 | |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.
