Regulatory mechanisms in lymphatic vessel contraction under normal and inflammatory conditions  Pierre-Yves von der Weid, Mariappan Muthuchamy  Pathophysiology  Volume 17, Issue 4, Pages 263-276 (September 2010) DOI: 10.1016/j.pathophys.2009.10.005 Copyright © 2009 Terms and Conditions

Fig. 1 Stylized lymphatic vessel diameter and calcium tracing, and proposed regulatory mechanisms for lymphatic muscle. Changes in vessel diameter due to an increased pressure or flow are shown as an example for functional and contractile behavior of the lymphatic vessel. An example of spontaneous contractions and calcium transients of rat mesenteric lymphatic vessel is shown. As discussed in the text, presence of both smooth and striated muscle-specific contractile and regulatory proteins in lymphatic muscle are listed. Possible combinations of smooth and striated muscle contractile and regulatory proteins that may involve in modulating tonic and phasic contractile mechanisms are proposed. SM—smooth muscle, MHC—myosin heavy chain, MLC—myosin light chain, MLCK—myosin light chain kinase, MLCP—myosin light chain phosphatase, TM—tropomyosin. Pathophysiology 2010 17, 263-276DOI: (10.1016/j.pathophys.2009.10.005) Copyright © 2009 Terms and Conditions

Fig. 2 Effect of intestinal inflammation on mesenteric lymphatic tonic and phasic contractile activity in the guinea pig model of TNBS-induced ileitis. Collecting lymphatic vessels in the guinea pig mesentery (arrows and dotted lines in c) have diameters markedly larger in TNBS-treated animals in vivo (c) as well as in isolated vessels (d), than those from sham-treated animals (a and b). The contraction frequency of isolated vessels is also strongly impaired by the treatment (compare b and d). Scales in a and b apply to c and d. Pathophysiology 2010 17, 263-276DOI: (10.1016/j.pathophys.2009.10.005) Copyright © 2009 Terms and Conditions