Abstract
It has long been appreciated that understanding the interactions between the host and the pathogens that make us sick is critical for the prevention and treatment of disease. As antibiotics become increasingly ineffective, targeting the host and specific bacterial evasion mechanisms are becoming novel therapeutic approaches. The technology used to understand host‐pathogen interactions has dramatically advanced over the last century. We have moved away from using simple in vitro assays focused on single‐cell events to technologies that allow us to observe complex multicellular interactions in real time in live animals. Specifically, intravital microscopy (IVM) has improved our understanding of infection, from viral to bacterial to parasitic, and how the host immune system responds to these infections. Yet, at the same time it has allowed us to appreciate just how complex these interactions are and that current experimental models still have a number of limitations. In this review, we will discuss the advances in vivo IVM has brought to the study of host‐pathogen interactions, focusing primarily on bacterial infections and innate immunity.
Highlights
Since the first study using intravital microscopy (IVM) was published in the 1800s, the technology has progressed significantly.[1,2] We have moved away from simple light microscopy of the frog tongue to sophisticated multiphoton laser systems, allowing us to image most organs in mammals
With the very recent advent of the white light confocal laser and spectrally tunable multiphoton system, comes the flexibility to tune across a full spectral range. This will allow for the use of Abbreviations: CRIg, complement receptor of the immunoglobulin superfamily; EPEC, enteropathogenic Escherichia coli; GI, gastrointestinal; Intraepithelial lymphocytes (IELs), intraepithelial lymphocytes; iNKT, invariant natural killer T; IVM, intravital microscopy; NETs, neutrophil extracellular traps; PAD4, peptidylarginine deiminase 4; RFP, red fluorescent protein; TRPV1, transient receptor potential vanilloid 1; UPEC, uropathogenic Escherichia coli; UTI, urinary tract infection
Baral et al.[68] showed that TRPV1+ nociceptor neurons crosstalk with neutrophils in the respiratory tract, which has a detrimental effect on survival and outcome during lethal Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia
Summary
Since the first study using intravital microscopy (IVM) was published in the 1800s, the technology has progressed significantly.[1,2] We have moved away from simple light microscopy of the frog tongue to sophisticated multiphoton laser systems, allowing us to image most organs in mammals. With the very recent advent of the white light confocal laser and spectrally tunable multiphoton system, comes the flexibility to tune across a full spectral range This will allow for the use of Abbreviations: CRIg, complement receptor of the immunoglobulin superfamily; EPEC, enteropathogenic Escherichia coli; GI, gastrointestinal; IELs, intraepithelial lymphocytes; iNKT, invariant natural killer T; IVM, intravital microscopy; NETs, neutrophil extracellular traps; PAD4, peptidylarginine deiminase 4; RFP, red fluorescent protein; TRPV1, transient receptor potential vanilloid 1; UPEC, uropathogenic Escherichia coli; UTI, urinary tract infection. We focus on key discoveries reported in recent studies, and have divided the review based on the organ imaged and the infection model used (i.e., systemic infections versus localized infections)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
