$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
Here, we put forward a detailed protocol for 3D imaging of intact organoids with single-cell resolution. To successfully perform this protocol, some critical steps have to be taken. In this section we highlight these steps and provide troubleshooting.
The first critical step is the removal of the 3D matrix. Most organoids are propagated in vitro with the use of matrices that mimic the in vivo extracellular environment to enhance the formation of well-polarized 3D structures. Fixating and subsequent staining within the 3D matrix is possible, but can be disadvantageous for the penetration of antibodies or can generate high background signal (data not shown). Efficient removal of matrices can be influenced by the type of matrix, the amount and size of the organoids and prolonged culturing. Therefore, optimization may be required for different culture conditions. For organoids cultured in Matrigel or BME, a 30−60 min step in ice-cold cell recovery solution is sufficient to dissolve the matrix without damaging the organoids. In addition, removal of the supporting 3D matrix could result in loss of native structures and disruption of organoid contacts with other cell types, for instance when organoids are co-cultured with fibroblasts or immune cells. Furthermore, optimal organoid fixation is crucial in preserving 3D tissue architecture, protein antigenicity and minimizing autofluorescence. Fixing for 45 min with 4% PFA at 4 °C is normally sufficient for labeling of a wide range of organoids and antigens. However, a longer fixation step, up to 4 h, is typically more appropriate for organoids expressing fluorescent reporter proteins, but will require optimization for different fluorophores. Fixation times shorter than 20 min are insufficient to properly label F-actin using phalloidin probes. Another common issue is the loss of organoids during the protocol. It is therefore important to (i) carefully coat pipet tips and tubes with 1% BSA-PBS as described when handling unfixed organoids to prevent them from sticking to plastics, (ii) use low-adherence or suspension plates to avert the sample from sticking to the plate, and (iii) allow enough time for the organoids to settle at the bottom of the plate before carefully removing buffers. Pipetting viscous FUnGI may introduce bubbles. Handling the cleared sample at RT decreases viscosity and improves ease-of-use, thereby minimizing loss of organoids. While most organoids are easy to handle, cystic organoids with an enlarged lumen have a high tendency to collapse when fixing with 4% PFA or when cleared with FUnGI. This effect can be reduced, but not completely prevented, by using a different fixative (e.g., formalin or PFA-glutaraldehyde). However, this could potentially impact autofluorescence, antibody penetration and epitope availability. When cystic organoids appear folded after clearing, it is advised to skip the clearing step and image by multi-photon microscopy, which is less hampered by light scattering. Lastly, obtaining the entire 3D structure of organoids can be challenging and requires minimal distance between coverslip and organoid. In addition, when organoids have room to move in their mounting agent, this can result in X- and Y-shifts while recording data in Z-depth. Using less silicone sealant during slide preparation can solve suboptimal mounting between coverslip and microscope slide. However, too little silicone may lead to organoid compression and loss of their inherent 3D structure. FUnGI improves handling for slide mounting and stability of organoids while imaging, due to its higher viscosity.
While this protocol can be used for a broad range of applications to study in depth cellular content and 3D architecture of intact organoids, certain limitations should be considered. This methodology is rather low-throughput and time-consuming. Indeed, users should bear in mind that imaging large intact organoids in 3D requires both tiling and sample acquisition in Z, leading to prolonged acquisition times. Faster imaging could be achieved by using microscope assets, including resonant or spinning disk scanner, or by light sheet microscope technology26. Another consideration is that markers can be heterogeneously expressed between different organoids from the same sample. Therefore, multiple organoids should be acquired to better capture this organoid heterogeneity in culture. Lastly, while the complete wet lab procedure is straightforward, postprocessing of data requires skills in image analysis software for 3D visualization and quantification, as well as statistics for mining all the information present in the dataset.
In the last decade, the field of volume imaging has greatly advanced, due to both the development of a wide range of optical clearing agents and improvements in microscopy and computational technologies27,30,31. While in the past most studies focused on large volume imaging of organs or associated tumors, more recently methods for smaller and more fragile tissues, including organoid structures, have been developed36,37,38. We recently published a simple and fast method for imaging whole-mount organoids of various origin, size and shape at the single cell level for subsequent 3D rendering and image analysis26, which we presented here with some improvements (e.g., FUnGI, silicone mounting) and accompanied by a video protocol. This method is superior to conventional 2D section-based imaging in deciphering complex cell morphology and tissue architecture (Figure 2) and easy to implement in laboratories with a confocal microscope. With slight adaptations to the protocol, the samples can be made compatible with, super-resolution confocal, multi-photon as well as light sheet imaging, which makes this protocol widely applicable and provides users with a powerful tool to better comprehend the multidimensional complexity that can be modeled with organoids.