Advances in small animal mesentery models for in vivo flow cytometry, dynamic microscopy, and drug screening

Table 1 Relationship between lymphocrit and other parameters of microlymphatic function

	Cell % concentrationcells/μL	Lymphocrit%	Proportion ofLymphangions%	Diameterμm	Parameters of phasic contractions		Valve activityPer minute	Cell velocity(μm/s)
					Amplitude(%)	Count of contractionsperminute
Group 1	< 3.75 × 104	< 2	22	106 ± 9ab	50 ± 15ab	12 ± 2	8 ± 0.5b	161 ± 191
Group 2	3.75 × 104-12.2 × 104	2-6	45	141 ± 8a	28 ± 7ac	12 ± 1	11 ± 1	254 ± 151
Group 3	> 12.2 × 104	> 6	33	165 ± 9b	14 ± 5bc	15 ± 1	16 ± 2.5b	214 ± 19

^aP < 0.05, vs Group 2;

^bP < 0.05, vs Group 3;

^cP < 0.05, vs Group 3.

Table 2 Effects of 15-min topical application of different vasoactive drugs on lymph microvessel functions

Drug	Diameter	Phasic activity	Lymph flow velocity
Sodium Nitroprusside (10-5 mol/L)	Dilation	Slight short-time inhibition	Unchanged
N-Nitro-L-Arginine (10-4 mol/L)	Unchanged	Stimulation	Stimulation
Isoprenaline (10-5 mol/L)	Constriction	Inhibition	Inhibition up to stasis
Metoprolol (10-5 mol/L)	Unchanged	Stimulation	Stimulation
Butoxamin (10-5 mol/L)	Unchanged	Slight stimulation	Unchanged
Dymethyl Sulfoxide, (30%)	Constriction	Stimulation	Stimulation in 50% of lymphangions
			Inhibition in 39% of lymphangions (without phasic contractions)

Table 3 Effects of 30% DMSO at the topical application on blood microvessel diameter

	Arterioles		Venules
Before application	16.5 ± 0.49	25.3 ± 0.69	16.1 ± 0.79	24.9 ± 0.74	34.8 ± 0.66
After DMSO application
1 min	17.4 ± 0.67	25.8 ± 1.09	18.6 ± 0.98a	29.6 ± 1.29a	39.0 ± 2.25
2 min	16.9 ± 0.83	28.1 ± 0.80a	19.2 ± 1.11a	28.9 ± 1.33a	38.8 ± 1.53a
3 min	19.2 ± 1.00a	27.1 ± 1.04	19.1 ± 1.10a	28.8 ± 0.75a	40.1 ± 1.63a

Significant differences from state before application,

^aP < 0.05.