4.0 Article

Visualization of Neutrophil Extracellular Traps and Fibrin Meshwork in Human Fibrinopurulent Inflammatory Lesions: III. Correlative Light and Electron Microscopic Study

期刊

ACTA HISTOCHEMICA ET CYTOCHEMICA
卷 49, 期 5, 页码 141-147

出版社

JAPAN SOC HISTOCHEMISTRY & CYTOCHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1267/ahc.16028

关键词

neutrophil extracellular traps; fibrin; correlative light and electron microscopy; scanning electron microscopy; confocal laser scanning microscopy

资金

  1. Fujita Health University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) released from dead neutrophils at the site of inflammation represent webs of neutrophilic DNA stretches dotted with granule-derived antimicrobial proteins, including lactoferrin, and play important roles in innate immunity against microbial infection. We have shown the coexistence of NETs and fibrin meshwork in varied fibrinopurulent inflammatory lesions at both light and electron microscopic levels. In the present study, correlative light and electron microscopy (CLEM) employing confocal laser scanning microscopy and scanning electron microscopy was performed to bridge light and electron microscopic images of NETs and fibrin fibrils in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded, autopsied lung sections of legionnaire's pneumonia. Lactoferrin immunoreactivity and 4'-6diamidino- 2-phenylindole (DAPI) reactivity were used as markers of NETs, and fibrin was probed by fibrinogen gamma chain. Of note is that NETs light microscopically represented as lactoferrin and DAPI-colocalized dots, 2.5 mu m in diameter. CLEM gave super-resolution images of NETs and fibrin fibrils: Dotted NETs were ultrastructurally composed of fine filaments and masses of 58 nm-sized globular materials. A fibrin fibril consisted of clusters of smooth-surfaced filaments. NETs filaments (26 nm in diameter) were significantly thinner than fibrin filaments (295 nm in diameter). Of note is that CLEM was applicable to formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded sections of autopsy material.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据