We describe a quantitative assay of transendothelial migration (TEM) that allows us to selectively study the interaction of monocytes with confluent human endothelial cell (HEC) monolayers. The HEC are grown on hydrated collagen gels; the monocytes need not be purified. 100% of monocytes transmigrated the monolayer within 1 h at 37 degrees C and accumulated in the subendothelial collagen; TEM of lymphocytes was not detected within this time. Migration of neutrophils from the same donor was much slower and incomplete, with only 14% of PMN transmigrating in 2 h. This rapid TEM occurs in the absence of exogenous chemoattractants, and HEC in this system do not express cytokine-inducible leukocyte adhesion molecules. A slight modification of the TEM assay allowed us to separate binding to the apical HEC surface from TEM. We found that tight apical surface binding was the rate-limiting step for TEM. Two-thirds of this binding and TEM could be blocked by a monoclonal antibody against the leukocyte beta 2 integrin chain CD18. This assay will allow us to dissect the mechanisms of both the binding and transmigration stages of diapedesis.
Skip Nav Destination
Article navigation
1 September 1992
Article|
September 01 1992
Monocyte-selective transendothelial migration: dissection of the binding and transmigration phases by an in vitro assay.
W A Muller,
W A Muller
Laboratory of Cellular Physiology and Immunology, Rockefeller University, New York, New York 10021.
Search for other works by this author on:
S A Weigl
S A Weigl
Laboratory of Cellular Physiology and Immunology, Rockefeller University, New York, New York 10021.
Search for other works by this author on:
W A Muller
,
S A Weigl
Laboratory of Cellular Physiology and Immunology, Rockefeller University, New York, New York 10021.
Online ISSN: 1540-9538
Print ISSN: 0022-1007
J Exp Med (1992) 176 (3): 819–828.
Citation
W A Muller, S A Weigl; Monocyte-selective transendothelial migration: dissection of the binding and transmigration phases by an in vitro assay.. J Exp Med 1 September 1992; 176 (3): 819–828. doi: https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.176.3.819
Download citation file:
Sign in
Don't already have an account? Register
Client Account
You could not be signed in. Please check your email address / username and password and try again.
Could not validate captcha. Please try again.
Sign in via your Institution
Sign in via your InstitutionSuggested Content
Email alerts
Advertisement