$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
3D imaging of the vertebral lymphatic vasculature
Figure 1 presents the steps of the iDISCO+/LSFM procedure and a LSFM image of lymphatic circuits inside the vertebral canal of iDISCO+-treated ThLb vertebrae. The combination of iDISCO+ with LSFM preserved the vertebral anatomy and captured a view of the lymphatic vascular network (i.e., the intravertebral vessels connected with the extravertebral vessels exiting dorsally and laterally from the vertebral body) within the surrounding bones, ligaments, muscles, and nerve ganglia.
Fluorescence macroscopy imaging of dcLN drainage
In order to image macromolecule drainage in the CNS-associated lymphatic system, macromolecular tracers were administrated in vivo by injection into either the CSF or the spinal parenchyma. A macromolecular tracer can be easily delivered into the CSF at the cisterna magna. The cisterna magna is located between the cerebellum and the dorsal surface of the medulla oblongata, above the foramen magnum. Macromolecular tracer can also be injected into the spinal parenchyma by stereotactic surgery at different levels along the vertebral column.
The macromolecular tracers used were either directly labeled with a fluorophore or detected postmortem by immunohistochemistry with specific antibodies. Figure 2A illustrates the experimental plan for tracking OVA-A555, a red fluorescent and small molecular weight tracer (around 45 kDa), that was injected into either the CSF (Figure 2B) or the ThLb region of the spinal cord (Figure 2C).
At 45 min after the macromolecular tracer injection, the mice were sacrificed, perfused with 4% PFA, and processed to isolate dissected segments of the brain stem region of the head and the vertebral column that were decalcified and clarified. Macromolecule drainage was then readily assessed by fluorescence macroscopy imaging of the LNs that collect the CSF and epidural fluids. As shown in Figure 2, OVA-A555 injection into either the CSF (Figure 2B) or the ThLb (Figure 2C) region of the spinal cord resulted in OVA-A555 accumulation into the dcLNs at 45 min after injection. This observation indicates the uptake and drainage of fluorescent tracer by the lymphatic system; it is a prerequisite before pursuing the iDISCO+/LSFM procedure to image the vertebral lymphatic drainage.
3D imaging of macromolecule drainage in the vertebral lymphatic system
Based on the detection of OVA-A555 labeling in dcLNs, the iDISCO+/LSFM procedure could be applied to decalcified and precleared vertebral samples isolated from OVA-A555-injected mice. This approach allowed the creation of a 3D map of the lymphatic drainage of CSF and spinal epidural fluid at a specific time point after tracer injection. This 3D mapping could be performed by imaging successive CNS segments, at each level of vertebral column, from the injection point.
Figure 3A shows the experimental design for OVA-A555 injection into the ThLb spinal parenchyma and the resulting 3D pattern of OVA-A555 distribution in a cervical and a thoracic vertebral segment, in conjunction with the lymphatic vasculature. At 45 min after OVA-A555 injection, OVA-A555 accumulation was detected in spinal cord tissues and dcLNs (white arrows in Figure 3B), in agreement with microscope observations illustrated in Figure 2. It was not detected, however, in the cervical and thoracic lymphatic vasculature labeled with anti-LYVE1 antibodies. The absence of CSF-injected tracer in the vertebral lymphatic vessels may be due to either a short persistence time of tracer inside lymphatic vessels or a lack of uptake of the tracer by the lymphatic vessels (Figure 3C).
To test the first hypothesis, the rabbit anti-LYVE1 antibody was used as a lymphatic endothelial cell tag to bind CNS-associated lymphatic vessels. The injected rabbit anti-LYVE1 antibody was thereafter detected by immunohistochemistry with an anti-rabbit secondary antibody, while lymphatic endothelial cells were immunolabeled with anti-PROX1 antibodies. Figure 4 represents the experimental design of anti-LYVE1 injection into the ThLb spinal parenchyma (Figure 4A), and the resulting 3D distribution pattern of LYVE1 antibodies in a ThLb segment close to the injection site, with respect to PROX1+ lymphatics (Figure 4B). Both vertebral lymphatics and their extravertebral lymphatic connections were labeled by injected anti-LYVE1 antibodies, which substantiated the tracer uptake by vertebral lymphatic vessels and the lymphatic drainage toward the extravertebral lymphatic system. LNs were lacking in the ThLb region and, thus, could not be visualized in the imaged segment. Furthermore, the discontinuous pattern of LYVE1 marker observed along lymphatic vessels likely reflected the discontinuous expression of LYVE1 in the lymphatic vasculature, as reported in previous studies14,21. Altogether, the results of the present study demonstrated that, at 45 min after tracer injection, LYVE1 antibody, but not OVA-A555, allowed detection of local vertebral lymphatic uptake and was preferrable to OVA-A555 as a persistent marker of local vertebral lymphatic drainage.

Figure 1: Three-dimensional view of the vertebral lymphatic vasculature. (A) Schematic representation of the protocol. (B) Planar projection of a 3D view of the ThLb vertebral lymphatic vasculature from a dorsofrontal perspective. Lymphatic vessels were immunolabeled with the anti-PROX1 antibody (green) using the iDISCO+ protocol and then imaged by LSFM. Note the metameric-like pattern of the vasculature within the vertebral canal of three successive vertebrae (white arrowheads). In addition to semicircular dorsal vessels (white arrowheads), each vertebral network included ventral branches (yellow arrows), bilateral lateral exit pathways along the spinal rami and ganglia (white arrows), as well as a dorsal exit route at the midline (white double arrow). Vertebral networks were interconnected with a longitudinal vessel (purple arrows). For a complete description, see Jacob L. et al.18 SC = spinal cord; Asterisk = ventral vertebral body; D = dorsal; L = lateral; V = ventral; Scale bars = 300 µm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2: dcLNs collected OVA-A555-labeled CSF Fluids. (A) Scheme of the experimental design. OVA-A555 was injected into either the ICM or the ThLb spinal parenchyma, then mice were sacrificed 45 min after injection. The samples were cleared and observed by fluorescence macroscope imaging (B,C). Fluorescence macroscope images of cervival vertebrae from ICM- (B) and ThLb- (C) injected mice. Note that OVA-A555 accumulated in the dcLNs (B,C, white arrowheads), the pial and paravascular spaces of the cervical spinal cord (B,C) and after ICM injection, in ventrolateral exit routes, likely along cervical nerves (B, white arrows). SC = spinal cord. Asterisk = ventral vertebral body; D = dorsal; L = lateral; V = ventral; Scale bars in B and C = 2 mm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 3: Detection of OVA-A555-labeled CSF fluids in the vertebral lymphatic system. (A) Scheme of the experimental design. OVA-A555 was injected into the ThLb spinal parenchyma, then mice were sacrificed at 45 min after injection. The samples were treated with the iDISCO+ protocol and imaged with a LSFM. (B,C) Planar projections of LSFM-captured frontal 3D views of cervical (B) and thoracic (C) spine segments. OVA-A555 accumulation (red) was detected in spinal cord tissues and dcLNs (B, white arrow), as illustrated in Figure 2, but not in the cervical and thoracic lymphatic vasculature immunolabeled here with anti-LYVE1 antibodies (green). SC = spinal cord; Asterisk = ventral vertebral body; D = dorsal; L = lateral; V = ventral; Scale bars = 1 mm (B), 300 µm (C). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 4: Detection of vertebral lymphatic drainage after intraspinal injection of anti-LYVE1 antibodies. (A) Scheme of the experimental design. Anti-LYVE1 antibodies were injected into the ThLb spinal parenchyma, then mice were sacrificed 45 min after injection. The samples were treated with the iDISCO+ protocol and imaged with a LSFM. (B). Planar projections of frontal 3D views of a ThLb (B) spine segment, captured with a LSFM. Anti-LYVE1 antibodies were detected with anti-rabbit antibodies (purple) and the lymphatic vasculature with anti-PROX1 antibodies (green). White vessels are PROX1+ lymphatics colabeled with anti-LYVE1 antibodies (B); these include vertebral (yellow arrows) and extravertebral (double yellow arrows) lymphatics. SC = spinal cord; Asterisk = ventral vertebral body; D = dorsal; L = lateral; V = ventral; Scale bars = 300 µm (B). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
| Reagents | Target | Figure | Protocol step | Comment |
| OVA-A555 | CSF tracer | Figure 2 and Figure 3 | 2. ICM or ThLb injection
7. LSFM imaging. | Water soluble, easy to inject and high intense fluorescence |
| Anti-Lyve1 antibody | Membrane marker of LVs cells | Figure 3 | 6. iDISCO+ whole mount immnunostaining.
7. LSFM imaging. | Efficient antibody to whole mount immnunostaining |
| Tracer drainage of the dural and epidural LVs | Figure 4 | 2. ICM or ThLb injection
6. iDISCO+ whole mount immnunostaining
7. LSFM imaging |
| Anti-Prox1 antibody | Nuclear marker of LVs cells | Figure 1 and Figure 4 | 6. iDISCO+ whole mount immnunostaining
7. LSFM imaging | Efficient antibody to whole mount immnunostaining |
Table 1: Antibodies and tracers used in the study.
| Problem | Possible reason | Solution |
| Surgery for tracer injection | Unwanted CNS tissue lesion | 1. Lack of control of glass capillary insertion
2. Incorrect depth of glass capillary insertion | 1. Punctate with care, but fully, the dura mater with a 26 G needle before glass capillary insertion.
2. Reduce the deepness of glass capillary insertion (<1.5 mm from the dura mater).
3. Reduce the glass capillary diameter. |
| Unwanted defilement of injected tracer into the epidural or extra-vertebral spaces | Incorrect injection of tracer | 1. Check if the glass micro capillary has been well inserted into the punctate the dura mater.
2. Add surgical glue between glass microcapillary and the surrounded tissue before injecting tracer. |
| Excessive volume of injected tracer | Reduce the volume of injected tracer (<2 µL). |
| iDISCO+ immunostaining | Absence, heterogeneity or excessive background of labeling in the tissue | 1. Issues with the concentration of the primary antibody
2. Insufficient permeabilization
3. Insufficient washing
4. Insufficient clearing | Increase the number and/or the time of incubation steps: permebilization, whashing, primary antibody and clearing. See http://www.idisco.info (FAQ AND TROUBLESHOOTING). |
| Insufficient decalcification | Use a more stringent decalcification treatment of sample with EDTA21 or Morse solution for head tissues especially. |
| iDISCO+ clearing | Samples are opaque or brown-colored | Insufficient bleaching | Use fresh H2O2 solution, increase volume and/or incubation time. |
| Presence of oxidation | Fill the tube completely to avoid the presence of air. |
| Insufficient clearing | Increase volume and/or incubation time. See http://www.idisco.info (FAQ AND TROUBLESHOOTING). |
| Tracer detection | Undetectable tracer | Incorrect combination of the selected tracer | Alexa 555, 594 and 647 fluorochromes are resistant to iDISCO+ protocol5,6,7,8,9,10. However, this is not the case for FITC, GFP, RFP fluorochromes. |
| Sacrifice timepoint after injection | Prefer OVA-A555 for short-term (15 min) drainage analysis in local vertebral lymphatics. For lymph nodes drainage analysis, OVA-A555 and Lyve1 antibody can be used for longer term (>45 min) analysis. |
| Imaging: capture and analysis | Captured images of the lymphatic circuit are not satisfactory | Dissection issue (lymph nodes are missing) | Include carefully the vertebral/skull neighboring tissues in your dissected sample, according to the lymphatic circuit that you want to image. |
| Imaging issue | 1. Modify the acquisition parameters of the LSFM: laser intensity, light-sheet numerical aperture, thickness of light-sheet, exposition time.
2. Place the sample in the support to reduce the path travelled by light through the tissue until the objective.
3. Be sure that there are no bubbles inside the tissue sample during acquisition. |
Table 2: Troubleshooting advice for each step of the protocol, including possible issues and solutions.