Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2023 May 23;18(5):e0285384. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0285384

The effects of postoperative treadmill exercise on rats with secondary lymphedema

Sang Ah Kim 1,2, Ma Nessa Gelvosa 1, Hwayeong Cheon 3, Jae Yong Jeon 1,*
Editor: Shimpei Miyamoto4
PMCID: PMC10204966  PMID: 37220160

Abstract

Cancer-related lymphedema (LE) is often caused by radiotherapy and surgery such as lymph node dissection (LND). Previous studies have reported that exercise is beneficial to relieve LE, but the changes in the lymphatic system following exercise are still unclear. This study aimed to examine the changes in lymphatic drainage pathways over the exercise period and beneficial effects of exercise in rats with LE. Twelve rats were randomly allocated into exercise and control groups (EG and CG; n = 6 each). To obtain LE, inguinal and popliteal LND followed by 20 Gy irradiation was performed. Treadmill exercise was 30 minutes/day, 5 days/week over the four-week period. Consecutive indocyanine green (ICG) lymphography images were collected and classified into five patterns: i) linear; ii) splash; iii) stardust; iv) diffuse, and v) none. Ankle thickness was measured weekly. Histopathological evaluation was performed to examine the skin thickness, collagen area fraction (%) and lymphatic vessel density in harvested tissue. ICG lymphography exhibited more linear and splash patterns in the EG at week 3. The difference of swelling between both groups was significantly different at week 4 (p = 0.016). Histopathologic data revealed a thinner epidermis (p = 0.041) and dermis (p = 0.002), lower collagen area fraction (%, p = 0.002), and higher lymph vessel density (p = 0.002) in the EG than the CG. In conclusion, we found that postoperative exercise can facilitate improvement in lymphatic fluid retention in the lymphedema rat model, resulting in improvement of pathological conditions in the lymphatic system.

Introduction

Cancer-related lymphedema (LE) is a chronic and debilitating disorder of the lymphatic system. Induced by lymphatic dysfunction, LE encompasses problems in lymphatic drainage, pumping and contractility, resulting in the accumulation of protein-abundant fluid in the interstitial space, thereby increasing volume [1, 2]. Secondary LE can be caused by radiation therapy, adjuvant chemotherapy and surgery such as lymph node dissection (LND) for patients with cancer. LE often progresses beyond excessive interstitial fluid accumulation to fibrosis.

There are currently several treatment options for LE. Vascular lymph node transplantation is a surgical option that involves the extraction of the normal lymph nodes (LNs) to transfer to the area affected by LE [3]. Lymphatic venous anastomosis, known as micro-operative, improves lymphatic flow by connecting lymphatic vessels to veins [4]. Non-surgical treatment primarily involves complex or complete decongestive therapy comprising manual lymphatic drainage, skin care, exercise, compression garments, and self-massage, which clinics have employed to relieve LE [57].

Exercise has been shown to improve symptoms, quality of life and muscle strength without the aggravation of LE [7, 8]. Previous reports have also suggested that physical exercise after LND can prevent LE occurrence [9]. This may be because extrinsic forces such as skeletal muscle contraction promote lymphatic flow and improve the blood circulation together with lymphatic circulation [10, 11]. ICG lymphography can be used to visualize changes in lymphatic drainage pathways [12, 13]. To better understand the effects of postoperative exercise, clarifying the changes in lymphatic drainage caused by exercise is vital. However, previous studies did not report on drainage changes with postoperative exercise [8, 9]. Our study therefore aims to use the rat hindlimb LE model to show changes in lymphatic drainage patterns with exercise immediately after surgical induction of LE and subsequently determine its contribution to improving pathological conditions in rats.

Materials and methods

All animal procedures were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) of the Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea (2020-12-275). The IACUC abides by the relevant guidelines including the ILAR and ARRIVE guidelines and this study strictly followed the recommendations in the IACUC. Fifteen 8-week-old female Sprague–Dawley rats (JA BIO Corporation, Republic of Korea) weighing 250–300 g were used. They were housed in a temperature- and light-controlled room. Twelve rats were randomly assigned to the exercise or control groups (EG and CG; n = 6 per group). Additionally, a subgroup of three rats that had undergone popliteal LN removal only was included to compare with the LE models, which had undergone removal of both popliteal and inguinal LNs.

Lymphedema induction procedure

To obtain the hindlimb LE model, rats were anesthetized to minimize suffering through inhalation of 4% isoflurane and injection of 10 mL/kg of tiletamine/zolazepam (Zoletil 50, Virbac, France) and xylazine (Rompun, Bayer Korea, Republic of Korea) at a volume ratio of 5:1 mixture before removal of the left inguinal and popliteal LNs. Only popliteal LN was removed in one subgroup. The surgical area was prepared by use of an electronic hair clipper followed by epilation with cream. Evans blue dye solution (30 mg/mL, 30 μL) was injected intradermally into the left side of the base of the tail and left hind paw to stain the inguinal and popliteal LNs, respectively (Fig 1A). Circumferential skin incision to subcutaneous tissue along the left groin was performed, and then the dyed inguinal and popliteal LNs were located. The incision line was above the location of the LNs (Fig 1B), which were extracted together with the surrounding adipose tissue. Edges of the incised skin were cauterized using an electrocautery device (Bovie® Medical Corporation, item No. 18010–00, USA) and sutured to the fascia using 4–0 nylon, leaving a 5 mm gap [14]. A single dose of 20 Gy radiation [15] was delivered into the groin area with an X-ray irradiator (X-Rad 320, Precision, CT, USA) while an 8-mm lead plate covered the rest of the body on postoperative day 2.

Fig 1. Schematic illustrating the surgical procedure.

Fig 1

(A) Located LNs, arrowheads indicate popliteal LN (left, black) and inguinal LN (right, white) after injection at hind footpad and base of tail, respectively. (B) Incision line (dashed line) was located above the location of the LNs for operated limb. LN, lymph node.

Treadmill exercise protocol

The EG started treadmill running 1 week after surgery. Rats were acclimatized to the treadmill (HYB®, LT320, No. 99–0070, China) by gradually increasing the speed over a 5-day period (5 to 12 m/min) throughout the first week of exercise [16]. Thereafter, the EG performed treadmill running at 10–12 m/min, 30 minutes/day, 5 days a week over 4 weeks. The CG rats did not perform any exercise after the operation.

Hindlimb thickness measurement

Rats were photographed weekly with the hair removed lying on a plate under 4% isoflurane inhalation. Ankle thickness 10 mm above the heel was then measured using ImageJ (Version 1.53, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA). The difference in ankle thickness relative to the contralateral limb was calculated to describe the extent of the swelling, and account for age-appropriate growth and variations in animal size. Analyses were performed by the same investigator blinded to the treatment groups. If the initial volume difference was more than 5%, it was regarded as edema due to lymphedema [15].

Analysis of ICG lymphography drainage patterns in hindlimb

Lymphatic pattern images were visualized using a customized near-infrared camera with a 730 nm high-power LED and bandpass filter (LST1-01G01-FRD1-00, Opulent Americas, NC, USA; FF01-832/27-50-D, Semrock, NY, USA). Under inhalation anesthesia, rats were injected intradermally with 30 μL ICG solution (1 mg/mL ICG and 2.5 mg/mL bovine serum albumin) into the hind paw. The injected area and hindlimb were massaged to allow the ICG solution to be absorbed into the lymphatic capillaries. Consecutive images just after injuries on ventroproximal hindlimb were collected, which were then classified according to five patterns (linear, splash with linear, stardust, diffuse, and none) as previously described [17] and scored (1 to 5) as appropriate (Fig 2). This procedure was performed every other week for 5 weeks (three times), starting from the initiation of the exercise program.

Fig 2.

Fig 2

Customized camera to visualize lymphatic pattern (left) and classification of lymphatic pattern (right). We classified and scored ICG lymphography images as follows: i) linear, clear lines appear (score 1); ii) splash with linear, the linear lymphatic vessels lie and several linear lymphatic vessels have a winding appearance (score 2); iii) stardust, shining dots are dispersed together with a faint luminous lymphatic vessel (score 3); iv) diffuse, blurry without a clear shape (score 4); and v) none, there is no pattern (score 5).

Analysis of histology and immunohistochemistry

Rats were euthanized at week 5 by carbon dioxide asphyxiation. Both hindlimbs were harvested and fixed in 4% buffered formalin for 24 hours at room temperature. Twenty-four samples of hindlimb (10 mm above the heel) were embedded in paraffin and segmented into slices at 5 μm-thick following adequate decalcifications. To measure the epidermal and dermal thickness and collagen area fraction (%, to tissue area below the epidermis) in the harvested tissue, forty-eight specimens were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and Masson’s trichrome (MT), respectively. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining was performed with twelve specimens to visualize lymphatic vessels using mouse monoclonal antibody D2-40 (ACR266B, Biocare Medical, CA, USA), which reacts to podoplanin found in lymphatic endothelium at a dilution of 1: 100.

Using a microscope (BX40, Olympus, Japan) and Olympus cellSens Standard software, a blinded investigator randomly selected four fields in each specimen for analysis and then calculated the following data according to a previously described protocol [18]: 1) thickness of epidermis and dermis in each H&E slide at x200 and x40, respectively; 2) collagen area fraction (%, to tissue area below the epidermis) stained by MT using ImageJ program; and 3) the number of D2-40 positive lymphatic vessels per high-power field (/HPF). Each data accounted for age-appropriate changes in growth and animal size using the following formula: (operated limb–non-operated limb) / (operated limb + non-operated limb).

Statistical analysis

Data were presented as mean ± standard deviation values and were analyzed using GraphPad Prism (GraphPad Software, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA). The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare the two groups. The Friedman test was used for comparisons over time, followed by Dunn’s multiple comparisons test. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the severity of ICG lymphography patterns over time in both groups. P-values of < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

Hindlimb thickness

As shown in Fig 3A, there was no difference in ankle thickness between the operated and contralateral limbs in the exercise and control groups at week 0. Figures of ankle thickness difference were the greatest at week 1 in EG and CG (1.829 ± 0.655 mm and 2.130 ± 0.464 mm, respectively). A reduction in swelling was observed in rats across both groups; however, a significant difference between the two groups was noted at week 4, with EG having a reduced ankle thickness difference from normal compared with CG (0.312 ± 0.232 mm vs. 0.950 ± 0.460 mm; p = .016, Mann–Whitney U test). Table 1 shows the extent of swelling in the EG decreased significantly at weeks 3, 4 and 5 compared with week 1 (p = .018, .030, and .030, respectively, Dunn’s test). Among the rats that underwent popliteal LN removal only, no gross swelling was observed and there was no notable difference in thickness between the ankles over time.

Fig 3. Comparison of changes in swelling, lymphatic pattern and pathophysiologic analysis between exercise and control groups.

Fig 3

(A) Thickness difference of both ankles in the exercise, control and subgroup measured with ImageJ. The p-values for each time point between exercise and control groups are as follows: week 1, p  =  .15; week 2, p  =  .631; week 3, p  =  .055; week 4, p  =  .016; and week 5, p  =  .423 (n  =  6 per group; * p < .05, Mann–Whitney U test). Subgroup represents a group of rats that underwent removal of only popliteal LN (n = 3). EG, exercise group; CG, control group; LN, lymph node. (B) Comparison between EG and CG of ICG lymphography patterns on ventroproximal. Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation. (left) Time course of score on the severity of the patterns in the EG and CG. In the EG, there were more linear and splash patterns than in the CG. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was performed to compare severity over time in each group. (right) Representative ICG images of the hindlimb at weeks 1, 3, and 5. Arrow indicates a linear signal. EG, exercise group; CG, control group. (C-I) Comparison of skin thickness, fibrosis and the number of LV between both groups. (C) Representative images of H&E-stained skin thickness of the operated leg. (D, E) Control group showed significantly thicker epidermis and dermis compared with the exercise group (n = 6, respectively; p < .05, Mann–Whitney U test). (F) MT staining of operated limbs showed the extent of skin fibrosis. (G) Collagen area fraction (%) in the control group was significantly higher than in the exercise group. (H, I) The number of lymphatic vessels per HPF significantly increased after exercise. Arrows indicate positive podoplanin lymphatic vessels. Scale bar: C = 50 μm and 200 μm, respectively; F and I = 50 μm. Original magnification: C = × 200 and × 40, respectively; F and I = × 400. Epi, epidermis; De, dermis; LV, lymphatic vessel; H&E, hematoxylin and eosin; MT, Masson’s trichrome; HPF, high-power field. * < .05, ** < .01.

Table 1. Thickness difference between both ankles for each week.

Exercise Control P-value
Week 1 1.829 ± 0.655 2.130 ± 0.464 0.15
Week 2 1.155 ± 0.708 1.617 ± 1.118 0.631
Week 3 0.325 ± 0.363 1.008 ± 0.510 0.055
Week 4 0.312 ± 0.232 0.950 ± 0.460 0.016*
Week 5 0.319 ± 0.242 0.519 ± 0.430 0.423
Friedman < .001ª 0.002ª
P-value

Data are shown as mean ± standard deviation.

ª Significantly different among weeks (P< 0.05, Friedman test)

Significantly different between week 1 and following weeks (P< 0.05, Dunn’s post-hoc test)

* Significantly different between groups for each week (P< 0.05, Mann–Whitney U test)

Changes in ICG lymphography drainage patterns in the hindlimb

Both groups had a similar score distribution at week 1 (EG: 4.2 ± 1.1 vs. CG: 4.0 ± 1.0) (Fig 3B, left). Whereas the EG had a lower severity score than CG at week 3, although the difference was not statistically significant. In the EG, dermal backflow disappeared and showed linear and splash patterns from week 3, while the CG continued to have dermal backflow at week 3 (Fig 3B, right). Moreover, ICG lymphography patterns improved with exercise (p = .094 vs. .375, respectively, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). Rats in the EG had a greater proportion of linear and splash patterns than the CG at week 3 (EG: 3/6 vs. CG: 1/6) (S1 Table). At week 5, the severity score in both groups was almost identical. New pathways were seen beyond the incision line in the groin region toward the axillary region at week 5 (n = 1, Fig A–C in S1 Fig). Rats in the EG that had undergone removal of both popliteal and inguinal LNs exhibited a ventro-cranial collateral pathway in place of the existing lateral pathway, which can be seen in rats that only underwent popliteal lymph node removal (Fig D in S1 Fig).

Histology and immunohistochemistry

Specimens stained with H&E in the CG showed significant thickening of the epidermis compared with the EG (EG: 0.12 ± 0.06 μm vs. CG: 0.22 ± 0.07 μm, p = .041) and dermis (EG: 0.05 ± 0.03 μm vs. CG: 0.2 ± 0.02 μm, p = .002) (Fig 3C–3E). The collagen area was significantly larger in the CG than in the EG (EG: 0.02 ± 0.01 vs. CG: 0.09 ± 0.03%, p = .002) (Fig 3F and 3G). Additionally, the lymphatic vessel density at the site of LND was significantly higher than the CG (EG: 4.7 ± 0.6 vs. CG: 3.0 ± 0.4 /HPF, p = .002) (Fig 3H and 3I).

Discussion

We obtained rat hindlimb LE models and demonstrated that postoperative exercise facilitated recovery in improved lymphatic drainage and swelling in the lymphedematous limb. We subsequently observed less fibrous tissues, dermal thickness, and denser tissue lymphatic vessels after the exercise period. These findings indicate that exercise may improve lymphatic fluid retention and temporarily reduce swelling with more persistent effects.

Previous researchers studied the creation of a hindlimb LE rat model [14, 15, 19]. Recently, Huang CW et al. [20] established a successful hindlimb LE rat model by removing popliteal and inguinal LN with a circumferential incision to block collateral lymphatic vessels. In our study, the subgroup that underwent the removal of popliteal LN showed mild swelling compared with the CG. Most rats with the removal of popliteal LN have a collateral pathway toward axillary LN through alongside the internodal blood vessel [21, 22]. However, we found the ventro-cranial collateral pathway after removing both the inguinal and popliteal LN, similar to the observations by Takeno Y et al. [23], which may explain the long-lasting model due to a lengthier time to detour using this pathway. Our findings suggest removing both popliteal and inguinal LNs, and to include a circumferential incision to ensure relatively prolonged hindlimb LE models.

Using ICG lymphography, a non-invasive method to identify the integrity of lymphatic function [12, 13, 23, 24], we traced changes in the lymphatic drainage system, including collateral pathways and dermal backflow. Dermal backflow represents aggravation of abnormal lymphatic drainage. Takeno et al. found that rats without surgery exhibited a linear signal in the hindlimb, while those that underwent inguinal and popliteal lymph node dissection showed dermal backflow patterns, such as stardust [12]. Our data showed that the dermal backflow pattern in the EG rats tended to decrease 2 weeks after beginning treadmill exercise compared with the CG rats. Additionally, a significant reduction in swelling of the lymphedematous hindlimb in the EG was observed from week 3, which differed significantly from that of the CG at week 4. Considering the recovery speed, we can assume that rats in the EG solved the drainage obstruction earlier than the CG.

After exercise, we found newly activated lymph vessels toward axillary LN from inguinal LN (n = 1) beyond the incision line. Previous reports suggest that the major compensatory pathway from the hindlimb after disruption of the existing pathway is toward inguinal and axillary LNs [12, 21, 25]. Additionally, we observed higher lymphatic vessel density after the exercise protocol. Podoplanin with antibody D2-40 is an important marker of endothelium that can distinguish collecting lymphatic vessels [26, 27] and is relatively specific to lymphatic vessels compared with other lymphatic endothelial markers [28]. These findings can suggest that exercise facilitates recruitment of previously inactive lymph vessels and lymphangiogenesis.

The rapid decrease in swelling after exercise may be attributed to lymphatic circulation and preserved lymphatic function together with muscle pumping associated with exercise. Additionally, lymphatic flow may be associated with exercise-induced muscle contraction [7, 29]. The flow is managed by extrinsic and intrinsic forces such as the skeletal and smooth muscles contraction in the vessels, respectively, which is accelerated by physical activity [10, 11]. The intact valvular function requires unidirectional continuous lymphatic flow wherein skeletal muscle plays a crucial role as an extrinsic force. In addition, several studies have reported that physical activity can induce a myokine response including irisin, which is produced by skeletal muscle activation [3032]. This response leads to anti-inflammation, which may alleviate lymphatic inflammation. Therefore, it is plausible that physical activity may lead to an accumulation of myokine, which may explain the mechanisms that promote the positive effects of exercise on lymphatics. Taken together with the results of our ICG lymphography, our hypothesis that exercise may provide the propulsion of lymphatic flow, facilitating the recovery of lymphatic fluid retention, is supported. Further studies regarding the mechanisms of irisin are needed.

The H&E slide analysis show a thicker epidermis and dermis in the CG compared with the EG. We also observed a larger collagen area fraction (%) with skin fibrosis in the CG. The relationship between dermal thickness and LE severity has been previously reported [27, 33, 34]. Skin thickening may result from excessive accumulation of lymphatic fluid in the cutaneous layer (i.e., dermal backflow) with the refluxed lymphatic fluid becoming adipose tissue. Similarly, a recent study with H&E staining observed thicker epidermis in rats with LE compared with the sham group [20]. Our findings conclude that postoperative exercise may lower the occurrence of fibrosis, which can be caused by relatively severe swelling and long-lasting lymphatic fluid retention.

Limitations

There are some limitations to the current study. First, achieving statistical significance and further translating findings to humans is challenging given the limited sample sizes. Second, despite similar lymphatic structures, the rat LE model is not a perfect representation of the human body given their ability to recover faster from lymphatic system obstruction. Nevertheless, an experimental study should be conducted for at least 4 weeks to identify the role of exercise, as demonstrated in previous animal studies using treadmill exercise. This study used long-lasting LE models for up to 5 weeks and showed the therapeutic effect of exercise. Future studies could investigate prophylactic effect of exercise in more rodent models with exercise before surgery and radiation therapy.

Conclusions

This study found that postoperative exercise can expedite recovery of lymphatic drainage and relieve swelling, thereby reducing the occurrence of fibrosis in rats that underwent removal of popliteal and inguinal lymph nodes followed by radiotherapy. However, further studies are required to elucidate the mechanism.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Classification of ICG pattern in both groups.

(DOCX)

S1 Fig. Visualized lymphatic pathways with ICG lymphography.

(DOCX)

S1 Appendix. The result of Dunn’s post-hoc test for changes in swelling over time and normality test for each data.

(XLSX)

Acknowledgments

We thank the core facilities of the Comparative Pathology Laboratory and Animal Experiment Laboratory at the ConveRgence mEDIcine research center (CREDIT), Asan Medical Center, for sharing their equipment, services, and expertise with us. Additionally, we would like to express our gratitude to Dr. Linhai Chen for his excellent assistance during the rat surgery.

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

JYJ was received fundings from the Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea (2021IP0037; https://ails.amc.seoul.kr/), and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (Ministry of Science and ICT, MSIT) (No. NRF-2019R1A2C1009055; https://www.nrf.re.kr/). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Schwager S, Detmar M. Inflammation and Lymphatic Function. Front Immunol. 2019;10:308. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2019.00308 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Petrek JA, Heelan MC. Incidence of breast carcinoma‐related lymphedema. Cancer. 1998;83(S12B):2776–81. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Cheng MH, Huang JJ, Wu CW, Yang CY, Lin CY, Henry SL, et al. The Mechanism of Vascularized Lymph Node Transfer for Lymphedema: natural lymphaticovenous drainage. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2014;133(2):192e–8e. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000437257.78327.5b [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Campisi C, Eretta C, Pertile D, da Rin E, Campisi C, Macciò A, et al. Microsurgery for treatment of peripheral lymphedema: long‐term outcome and future perspectives. Microsurgery. 2007;27(4):333–8. doi: 10.1002/micr.20346 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Do JH, Choi KH, Ahn JS, Jeon JY. Effects of a complex rehabilitation program on edema status, physical function, and quality of life in lower-limb lymphedema after gynecological cancer surgery. Gynecol Oncol. 2017; 147(2):450–455. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2017.09.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Fish ML, Grover R, Schwarz GS. Quality-of-Life Outcomes in Surgical vs Nonsurgical Treatment of Breast Cancer–Related Lymphedema: A Systematic Review. JAMA Surg. 2020;155(6):513–9. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2020.0230 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Brennan MJ, Miller LT. Overview of treatment options and review of the current role and use of compression garments, intermittent pumps, and exercise in the management of lymphedema. Cancer. 1998;83(12 Suppl American):2821–7. doi: [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Yildiz Kabak V, Gursen C, Aytar A, Akbayrak T, Duger T. Physical activity level, exercise behavior, barriers, and preferences of patients with breast cancer-related lymphedema. Support Care Cancer. 2021;29(7):3593–3602. doi: 10.1007/s00520-020-05858-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Sisman H, Sahin B, Duman BB, Tanriverdi G. Nurse-assisted education and exercise decrease the prevalence and morbidity of lymphedema following breast cancer surgery. J BUON. 2012;17(3):565–569. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Planas-Paz L, Lammert E. Mechanical forces in lymphatic vascular development and disease. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2013;70(22):4341–4354. doi: 10.1007/s00018-013-1358-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Desai P, Williams AG, Prajapati P, Downey HF. Lymph flow in instrumented dogs varies with exercise intensity. Lymphatic Research and Biology. 2010;8(3):143–8. doi: 10.1089/lrb.2009.0029 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Takeno Y, Fujimoto E. Alterations of lymph flow after lymphadenectomy in rats revealed by real time fluorescence imaging system. Lymphology. 2013;46(1):12–19. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Nakajima Y, Asano K, Mukai K, et al. Near-Infrared Fluorescence Imaging Directly Visualizes Lymphatic Drainage Pathways and Connections between Superficial and Deep Lymphatic Systems in the Mouse Hindlimb. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):7078. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-25383-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Kanter MA, Slavin SA, Kaplan W. An experimental model for chronic lymphedema. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1990;85(4):573–580. doi: 10.1097/00006534-199004000-00012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Yang CY, Nguyen DH, Wu CW, et al. Developing a Lower Limb Lymphedema Animal Model with Combined Lymphadenectomy and Low-dose Radiation. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2014;2(3):e121. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000064 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Koch LG, Britton SL. Rat Models of Exercise for the Study of Complex Disease. Methods Mol Biol. 2019;2018:309–317. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-9581-3_15 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Yamamoto T, Narushima M, Doi K, et al. Characteristic indocyanine green lymphography findings in lower extremity lymphedema: the generation of a novel lymphedema severity staging system using dermal backflow patterns. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127(5):1979–1986. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31820cf5df [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Wang Z, Kim KY, Yoon SH, et al. Radiation Inhibits Lymph Drainage in an Acquired Lymphedema Mouse Hindlimb Model. Lymphat Res Biol. 2020;18(1):16–21. doi: 10.1089/lrb.2018.0072 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Harb AA, Levi MA, Corvi JJ, et al. Creation of a Rat Lower Limb Lymphedema Model. Ann Plast Surg. 2020;85(S1 Suppl 1):S129–S134. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000002323 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Huang CW, Chang YC, Hsiao HY, Liu JW, Chang FC, Huang JJ. Creation of a rat lymphedema model using extensive lymph node dissection and circumferential soft tissue resection: Is this a reliable model?. Microsurgery. 2021;41(8):762–771. doi: 10.1002/micr.30817 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Kwon S, Agollah GD, Wu G, Sevick-Muraca EM. Spatio-temporal changes of lymphatic contractility and drainage patterns following lymphadenectomy in mice. PLoS One. 2014;9(8):e106034. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106034 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Yamaji Y, Akita S, Akita H, et al. Development of a mouse model for the visual and quantitative assessment of lymphatic trafficking and function by in vivo imaging. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):5921. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-23693-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Takeno Y, Arita H, Fujimoto E. Efficacy of complete decongestive therapy (CDT) on edematous rat limb after lymphadenectomy demonstrated by real time lymphatic fluid tracing. Springerplus. 2013;2(1):225. doi: 10.1186/2193-1801-2-225 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Medina-Rodríguez ME, de-la-Casa-Almeida M, Mena-Rodríguez A, González-Martín JM, Medrano-Sánchez EM. Relationship between perimetric increase and fluoroscopic pattern type in secondary upper limb lymphedema observed by Indocyanine green lymphography. Medicine (Baltimore). 2020;99(24):e20432. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000020432 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Kwon S, Price RE. Characterization of internodal collecting lymphatic vessel function after surgical removal of an axillary lymph node in mice. Biomed Opt Express. 2016;7(4):1100–1115. doi: 10.1364/BOE.7.001100 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Barone V, Borghini A, Tedone Clemente E, Aglianò M, Gabriele G, Gennaro P, et al. New Insights into the Pathophysiology of Primary and Secondary Lymphedema: Histopathological Studies on Human Lymphatic Collecting Vessels. Lymphatic Research and Biology. 2020;18(6):502–9. doi: 10.1089/lrb.2020.0037 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Rockson SG, Tian W, Jiang X, et al. Pilot studies demonstrate the potential benefits of antiinflammatory therapy in human lymphedema. JCI Insight. 2018;3(20):e123775. doi: 10.1172/jci.insight.123775 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Ji RC. Characteristics of lymphatic endothelial cells in physiological and pathological conditions. Histol Histopathol. 2005;20(1):155–175. doi: 10.14670/HH-20.155 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Miranda Garcés M, Mirapeix R, Pons G, Sadri A, Masià J. A comprehensive review of the natural lymphaticovenous communications and their role in lymphedema surgery. J Surg Oncol. 2016;113(4):374–380. doi: 10.1002/jso.24158 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Hespe GE, Kataru RP, Savetsky IL, et al. Exercise training improves obesity-related lymphatic dysfunction. J Physiol. 2016;594(15):4267–4282. doi: 10.1113/JP271757 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Li H, Wang F, Yang M, Sun J, Zhao Y, Tang D. The Effect of Irisin as a Metabolic Regulator and Its Therapeutic Potential for Obesity. Int J Endocrinol. 2021;2021:6572342. doi: 10.1155/2021/6572342 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Pedersen BK, Febbraio MA. Muscles, exercise and obesity: skeletal muscle as a secretory organ. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2012;8(8):457–465. doi: 10.1038/nrendo.2012.49 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Karkkainen MJ, Saaristo A, Jussila L, et al. A model for gene therapy of human hereditary lymphedema. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98(22):12677–12682. doi: 10.1073/pnas.221449198 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Tian W, Rockson SG, Jiang X, et al. Leukotriene B4 antagonism ameliorates experimental lymphedema. Sci Transl Med. 2017;9(389):eaal3920. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aal3920 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Mehmet Cudi Tuncer

29 Dec 2022

PONE-D-22-30319The effects of postoperative treadmill exercise on rats with secondary lymphedemaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Jeon,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 12 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Mehmet Cudi Tuncer, Ph.D.

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: No

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This manuscript aims to provide badly needed information about exercise effects on lymphedema. The authors use a rat model, which they recognize as limited in ability to accurately portray human lymphedema. Time points were chosen to capture effects that appear to wane by 5 weeks post-RT. At 3 weeks post-RT, however, significant differences were noted in EG and CG.

Several studies by other groups have shown that exercise, and some studies have shown that irisin, which is produced in exercise, have positive effects on lymphatics--these studies should be mentioned in the discussion and cited. doi: 10.1113/JP271757, doi: 10.1155/2021/6572342, doi: 10.1096/fj.201800178R.

Why not exercise some rats before surgery/RT to investigate prophylactic effect of exercise? (remove lines 281-284, replace with "Future studies could investigate prophylactic.....")

Figure 3B shows significance, but only at week 3--this is probably due to the difficulty of deriving an accurate animal model of RT.

The analysis using ICG is subjective and difficult to judge from Figure 3B. EG at week 5 appears to have some backflow, and CG did not take up dye--this figure should be enlarged and include more than images from just one rat per time point, or deleted entirely--the fibrosis, collagen fraction, and # of lymphatic vessels/HPF are more convincing. Figure 3C H&E skin thickness appears to have selected thickest area for CG and thinner area for EG--maybe use a different example set for these images?

Reviewer #2: The author describes one of the first experimental animal model for Lymphedema. At the state of art, there is no recognized in vivo model for the study of lymphedema, although recent reports have proposed a rat model. The authors developed the model previously described and conducted a study assessing the effect of physical exercise on surgically induced lymphedema.

This is an interesting and original study. Nevertheless, there are some concerns that should be addressed before considering the manuscript for publication.

The authors propose a new animal model for lymphedema. Have you validated/ described it before conducting this experimental study? Which criteria did you use to make sure that all the animals developed lymphedema, other than postoperative swelling? Do you have a baseline of the ICG study to support its use in your model?

The authors operated one limb of each animal and used the contralateral as a control for at least the measurement of the circumference/thickness of the limbs. They correctly used the difference of the thickness between the healthy limb and the operated one to compare experimental and control group. It is not clear in the manuscript if they use the contralateral healthy limb as control also for the comparison of lymphatic pattern, histology and immunohistochemistry between exercise and control groups. The exercise itself along with control of weight could induce reduction of the thickness of the tissue and influence the composition of connective tissue and tissue markers even in healthy limb. I think that to properly evaluate the effect of the exercise on lymphedema, the data of the affected limbs should be related to those from the healthy limb.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Melissa B Aldrich

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2023 May 23;18(5):e0285384. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0285384.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


2 Feb 2023

Responses to Reviewer 1

Comment 1: This manuscript aims to provide badly needed information about exercise effects on lymphedema. The authors use a rat model, which they recognize as limited in ability to accurately portray human lymphedema. Time points were chosen to capture effects that appear to wane by 5 weeks post-RT. At 3 weeks post-RT, however, significant differences were noted in EG and CG.

Response: Thank you for your understanding of our manuscript. As you have mentioned, this manuscript aimed to provide beneficial information about the effects of exercise on lymphedema. In this study, radiation therapy was used as a method to induce chronic lymphedema together with lymph node dissection to reproduce human secondary lymphedema. Despite the functional defect of the lymphatic vessels due to external injury, the exercise group tended to have less lymphedema than the control group from immediately after surgery to the 5th week. The difference between the groups was most prominent at week 3, which can be seen as promoting the functional recovery of lymph through exercise performance. This can be supported by our results of histology/IHC as well as ICG lymphography at 3 weeks.

In animal models, considering the turnover rate of interstitial fluid and lifespan compared to humans, it cannot be expressed in the same cycle as humans (Dutta, Sulagna, and Pallav Sengupta. “Men and mice: Relating their ages.” Life sciences vol. 152 (2016): 244-8. doi:10.1016/j.lfs.2015.10.025). We believe that reproducing human chronic lymphedema is limited as animal models tend to have a faster rate of disease development and recover faster than that of humans. However, animal studies may be valuable for studying the progression and treatment of long-lasting chronic diseases with relatively short observations. Therefore, the current study is meaningful in providing evidence for future studies to prove that exercise can be effective for patients with lymphedema. We have described this in the Discussion section on page 12, lines 255 to 256 and the Limitation section on page 14, lines 290 to 294.

Comment 2: Several studies by other groups have shown that exercise, and some studies have shown that irisin, which is produced in exercise, have positive effects on lymphatics--these studies should be mentioned in the discussion and cited. doi: 10.1113/JP271757, doi: 10.1155/2021/6572342, doi: 10.1096/fj.201800178R.

Response: We are grateful for the insightful comments and suggestions helpful to our manuscript. This made us look at our findings in a different light. However, in the case of our study, it seems slightly out of scope because exercise-induced irisin response has been associated with obesity and mesenteric lymphatic function in previous studies. The mechanism remains unclear in terms of lymphatic system in the extremities. Nonetheless, your suggestion has been included in the Discussion section as a possible mechanism to direct future research. It can be found on page 13, lines 271 to 275.

Comment 3: Why not exercise some rats before surgery/RT to investigate prophylactic effect of exercise? (remove lines 281-284, replace with "Future studies could investigate prophylactic.....")

Response: We have modified our manuscript taking into account your comments. This change can be found on page 14, Limitation, lines 294 to 296.

Comment 4: Figure 3B shows significance, but only at week 3--this is probably due to the difficulty of deriving an accurate animal model of RT.

Response: As I mentioned in my response to comment 1, we induced lymphedema by performing lymph node dissection along with RT. We therefore considered the animal models to be accurate for lymphedema according to our criterion that a volume difference greater than 5% was indicative of lymphedema as previous study mentioned. We have updated this information on page 6, lines 118 to 119. In addition, we observed that the rats in the exercise group had more severe swelling compared to those of control group at week 4. Moreover, as the lymphangiography (Figure 3B) showed significance at week 3, we were able to say that the improved lymphatic flow was associated with significantly lower ankle thickness at week 4.

Comment 5: The analysis using ICG is subjective and difficult to judge from Figure 3B. EG at week 5 appears to have some backflow, and CG did not take up dye--this figure should be enlarged and include more than images from just one rat per time point, or deleted entirely--the fibrosis, collagen fraction, and # of lymphatic vessels/HPF are more convincing.

Response: Thank you for pointing this out. Although the ICG lymphography may be subjective, it is a method primarily used to investigate accessory and/or collateral lymphatic pathways as well as to evaluate lymphatic function in vivo without sacrificing rats. As described in the manuscript, the same amount of dye was injected into each rat and relatively reduced lymphatic function is expected to result in poor drainage of the dye in the CG. However, we agree with your comment and have replaced the figures in Figure 3B with others to clarify our intentions.

Comment 6: Figure 3C H&E skin thickness appears to have selected thickest area for CG and thinner area for EG--maybe use a different example set for these images?

Response: We have provided alternative figures in Figure 3C based on your suggestion.

Responses to Reviewer 2

Comment 1: The author describes one of the first experimental animal model for Lymphedema. At the state of art, there is no recognized in vivo model for the study of lymphedema, although recent reports have proposed a rat model. The authors developed the model previously described and conducted a study assessing the effect of physical exercise on surgically induced lymphedema.

This is an interesting and original study. Nevertheless, there are some concerns that should be addressed before considering the manuscript for publication.

Response: Thank you for your comprehensive understanding of our manuscript. However, the rat model used in this study is not the first experimental animal model for lymphedema, and we tried to derive an optimal model based on the lymphedema rodent model as previous studies had described and use it in the current study. We have mentioned this in the Discussion section on page 12, lines 239 to 247.

Please note that the following articles on the experimental animal model for lymphedema:

1. Kanter MA, Slavin SA, Kaplan W. An experimental model for chronic lymphedema. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1990;85(4):573–580. doi:10.1097/00006534-199004000-00012

2. Yang CY, Nguyen DH, Wu CW, et al. Developing a lower limb lymphedema animal model with combined lymphadenectomy and low-dose radiation. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2014;2(3):e121. Published 2014 Apr 7. doi:10.1097/GOX.0000000000000064

3. Huang CW, Chang YC, Hsiao HY, Liu JW, Chang FC, Huang JJ. Creation of a rat lymphedema model using extensive lymph node dissection and circumferential soft tissue resection: Is this a reliable model?. Microsurgery. 2021;41(8):762–771. doi:10.1002/micr.30817

Comment 2: The authors propose a new animal model for lymphedema. Have you validated/ described it before conducting this experimental study?

Response: We have described the content about animal model in the Discussion section on page 12, lines 244 to 248. The animal model has been reported in previous studies and we identified that the model with removal of both inguinal and popliteal lymph nodes was validated compared to removal of popliteal lymph node alone.

Comment 3: Which criteria did you use to make sure that all the animals developed lymphedema, other than postoperative swelling?

Response: Postoperative edema (surgery-related edema) rather than lymph node dissection may be observed at week 1. However, in a previous study, edema volume caused by sham surgery was significantly less than that of lymphedema, and a linear pattern with lymph nodes was captured by ICG lymphography (Huang CW et al. 2021, among the list of studies above). This is supported by our results of week 2 volume, which increased to more than the week 1 volume, and the ICG lymphography. An explanation of the criteria has been added on page 6, lines 118 to 119.

Comment 4: Do you have a baseline of the ICG study to support its use in your model?

Response: ICG lymphography can be used to investigate lymphatic function in vivo. ICG staging has also been applied for assessing severity of lymphedema in humans. Additionally, our previous study showed significant results in ICG lymphography staging, which can represent the severity of dermal backflow according to changes in lymphatic function (Cheon H. et al. 2022). In mild stages of lymphatic dysfunction, lymphatic vessels appear as several distinct lines, either extended to find new pathways or alternative pre-existing pathways. This is called the splash pattern. Lymphatic drainage is not properly performed, and as lymphatic function gradually deteriorates, back flow is formed on the surface, which shows several points shining like stars, known as stardust. In a more serious situation, the lymphatic fluid does not take the form of a lymphatic vessel, and the lymphatic fluid spreads to several places and appears blurry, which is called a diffuse pattern. This content can be found on page 6, lines 127 to 129 and the legend in Figure 2.

Please refer to the following previous studies:

1. Cheon, H., Gelvosa, M. N., Kim, S. A., Song, H. Y., & Jeon, J. Y. (2022). Lymphatic channel sheet of polydimethylsiloxane for preventing secondary lymphedema in the rat upper limb model. Bioengineering & Translational Medicine, e10371. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/btm2.10371

2. Yamamoto T, Narushima M, Doi K, et al. Characteristic indocyanine green lymphography findings in lower extremity lymphedema: the generation of a novel lymphedema severity staging system using dermal backflow patterns. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127(5):1979–1986. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e31820cf5df

Comment 5: The authors operated one limb of each animal and used the contralateral as a control for at least the measurement of the circumference/thickness of the limbs. They correctly used the difference of the thickness between the healthy limb and the operated one to compare experimental and control group. It is not clear in the manuscript if they use the contralateral healthy limb as control also for the comparison of lymphatic pattern, histology and immunohistochemistry between exercise and control groups. The exercise itself along with control of weight could induce reduction of the thickness of the tissue and influence the composition of connective tissue and tissue markers even in healthy limb. I think that to properly evaluate the effect of the exercise on lymphedema, the data of the affected limbs should be related to those from the healthy limb.

Response: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with your comment and have revised the method for analysis of histology. To be specific, the comparison of operated limbs between both groups has been updated with the comparison of normalized data between the groups as follows: (operated – non-operated) / (operated + non-operated). This has been mentioned on page 8, lines 155 to 157. Each normalized raw data regarding skin thickness and collagen area can be found in Figure 3D-G and Supporting Appendix S1.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Shimpei Miyamoto

4 Apr 2023

PONE-D-22-30319R1The effects of postoperative treadmill exercise on rats with secondary lymphedemaPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Jeon,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by May 19 2023 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Shimpei Miyamoto

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: all concerns addressed--no further revisions needed

all figures updated, all limitations and suggestions incorporated

Reviewer #2: I wish to thank the Authors for providing an updated version of the manuscript. They carefully revised the manuscript and he quality of the study improved significantly.

I still would like to receive a clear answer regarding the following point:

“Do you have a baseline of the ICG study to support its use in your model?” The Reviewers and the readers know the staging of lymphedema according to ICG findings in humans. And this is not applicable to other models unless validated. As this imaging technique has not been extensively performed on animal models, authors are encouraged to have a baseline to compare with postoperative findings.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Melissa B Aldrich

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2023 May 23;18(5):e0285384. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0285384.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


7 Apr 2023

Responses to editorial comments

Thank you for providing us with the opportunity to revise our manuscript. We have carefully considered the comments and suggestions of the reviewers and have made revisions accordingly. We hope that these changes and responses meet the expectations of PLOS ONE, and that the manuscript is now suitable for publication.

Comment: If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

Response: Thank you for the suggestion. While we appreciate it, we anticipate that our current laboratory protocols will be refined in the near future to yield clearer results. As part of our efforts to enhance the reproducibility of our research findings, we plan to deposit our improved laboratory protocols on Protocols.io.

Response to Reviewer 2

Thank you for reviewing our manuscript. Our answers to your queries are as follows.

Comment 1: I still would like to receive a clear answer regarding the following point:

“Do you have a baseline of the ICG study to support its use in your model?” The Reviewers and the readers know the staging of lymphedema according to ICG findings in humans. And this is not applicable to other models unless validated. As this imaging technique has not been extensively performed on animal models, authors are encouraged to have a baseline to compare with postoperative findings.

Response: Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Previous studies have utilized rats in order to observe lymphatic drainage patterns via ICG lymphography. Ogata et al. analyzed ICG images of hindlimbs from rats that had undergone lymph node dissection seven days after surgery. Their results indicated that the ICG images displayed diffuse or blurry patterns. Additionally, Takeno et al. reported that in a hindlimb non-operative rat model, a linear signal was observed, while in the operative hindlimb after inguinal and popliteal lymph node dissection, dermal backflow patterns, such as stardust, were shown. This suggests that detecting the linear pattern earlier in the operated limb will result in a quicker recovery process and a return to the state prior to surgery. We have described these findings on page 12, lines 249 to 254 in the main text.

Please refer to the list of previous studies I mentioned below:

1. Ogata F, Azuma R, Kikuchi M, Koshima I, Morimoto Y. Novel lymphography using indocyanine green dye for near-infrared fluorescence labeling. Ann Plast Surg. 2007 Jun;58(6):652-5. doi: 10.1097/01.sap.0000250896.42800.a2. PMID: 17522489.

2. Takeno Y, Fujimoto E. Alterations of lymph flow after lymphadenectomy in rats revealed by real time fluorescence imaging system. Lymphology. 2013 Mar;46(1):12-9. PMID: 23930437.

Additional clarifications

In addition to the above comments, all spelling and grammatical errors have been corrected. Furthermore, references 3 (page 15, lines 316 – 318) and 7 (page 16, lines 331 – 332) have been updated with the latest information.

Thank you again for reviewing our manuscript in detail and providing helpful comments. We hope that our responses and the corresponding revisions are satisfactory.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 2

Shimpei Miyamoto

24 Apr 2023

The effects of postoperative treadmill exercise on rats with secondary lymphedema

PONE-D-22-30319R2

Dear Dr. Jeon,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Shimpei Miyamoto

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Shimpei Miyamoto

16 May 2023

PONE-D-22-30319R2

The effects of postoperative treadmill exercise on rats with secondary lymphedema

Dear Dr. Jeon:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Shimpei Miyamoto

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Classification of ICG pattern in both groups.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Fig. Visualized lymphatic pathways with ICG lymphography.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Appendix. The result of Dunn’s post-hoc test for changes in swelling over time and normality test for each data.

    (XLSX)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES