$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
T cells are one of the major effector cell types in adaptive immunity, with described roles across diverse disease categories, including infections, autoimmunity, and malignancy1,2,3. A critical step for T cell functionality is the three-phase priming by antigen-presenting cells within secondary lymph organs, such as local lymph nodes4. In modern medicine, a mainstay of proper oncologic resection across multiple organ systems includes some degree of local sampling or en bloc lymph node resection5,6,7,8. For example, in colon cancer, consensus guidelines recommend that 12 lymph nodes be removed and examined in curative-intent resection due to a clear correlation with improved long-term survival6,7. However, can local lymph nodes truly be resected with impunity? Recent studies in mice have demonstrated that the tumor-draining lymph node contains a reservoir of antitumor T cell precursors, which may be protected from the terminal differentiation and T cell exhaustion that occurs within the tumor microenvironment9,10,11. This would suggest that removing such a critical population could dampen ongoing immunosurveillance capabilities.
The gut lymph drainage pattern in mice is known to be quite specialized along the mesenteric lymph node chain; for example, the proximal colon is almost exclusively drained by the first lymph node station, the small intestines by the second/third station, and the distal colon predominantly by the fourth lymph node station12 (Figure 1, Supplementary Figure 1). Thus, direct communication between segments of the gut and lymphatics can be disrupted with targeted ablation of these nodes. To block trafficking between lymph nodes and tissues, S1P receptor agonists, such as FTY720, and integrin blockade are commonly used; however, these drugs broadly inhibit trafficking and thus cannot be used to investigate the contribution of specific lymph nodes13,14. However, the ability of the wider scientific community to study the local effect of immune interactions within gut lymph nodes is limited by the absence of a well-described surgical resection for each station. With this gap in mind, a survival procedure for murine mesenteric lymphadenectomy at each node station was developed and is described here. The overall goal of this procedure is to achieve safe and reliable excision of the mesenteric lymph node station(s) in mice with high postoperative survival and tolerance.
This procedure has been tested and is easily performed in juvenile and adult age mice across multiple strains (i.e.,Balb/c, C57BL/6J, 129S4), but it is limited by the need for accessible and easily identifiable lymph nodes. Therefore, it may not be well-suited to combine with mouse models or genotypes with smaller than usual or imperceptible lymph nodes (e.g., lymphotoxin-alpha deficient mice)15. In addition, older mice (>15 weeks) tend to have more visceral adiposity, making lymph node identification and isolationmore difficult, and while this is not a contraindication, it can be success/procedure-limiting. Aside from these limitations, the mesenteric lymphadenectomy offers a highly controlled and highly selective perturbation of lymph nodes. This procedure would be best suited to unravel questions about the local effect of lymph nodes and their associated resident immune cells and interactions on segments of the gut (e.g., proximal colon, distal colon, small intestine).

Figure 1: Anatomical landmarks of stations in the mesenteric lymph node chain. (A) Unlabeled and (B) labeled depiction of four major mesenteric lymph node stations in situ. Proximal colon drainage is predominantly via station 1, small intestine is predominantly station 2/3, and distal colon is predominantly station 4. (DC= distal colon, ICV= ileocolic vessels, PC= proximal colon, CEC= cecum, IV/JV= ileal vessels/jejunal vessels, SI= small intestine). Scale bars: 1.5 cm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.