Aerosol Delivery to Simulated Spontaneously Breathing Tracheostomized Adult Model With and Without Humidification

BACKGROUND

Optimal aerosol delivery methods for spontaneously breathing patients with a tracheostomy remain unclear. Thus, we aimed to assess the impact of nebulizer placement, flow settings, and interfaces on aerosol delivery by using a vibrating mesh nebulizer and a jet nebulizer in line with unheated humidification.

METHODS

An 8.0-mm tracheostomy tube was connected to the lung model that simulates adult breathing parameters via a collecting filter. Albuterol sulfate (2.5 mg/3 mL) was administered via a vibrating mesh nebulizer and a jet nebulizer, which was placed in line with unheated humidification provided by a large-volume nebulizer, with FIO2 set at 0.28, with gas flows of 2 L/min versus 6 L/min. Nebulizers were placed in line distal and proximal to the lung model by using a tracheostomy collar and a T-piece. Conventional nebulization was tested using a vibrating mesh nebulizer and a jet nebulizer directly connected to the tracheostomy tube bypassing the humidification device. The drug was eluted from the collecting filter and assayed with ultraviolet spectrophotometry (276 nm).

RESULTS

During in-line nebulizer placement with unheated humidification, the inhaled dose was 2-4 times higher with a gas flow of 2 L/min than 6 L/min, regardless of nebulizer type, placement, or interface (all P < .05). At 6 L/min, the inhaled dose was higher with proximal than distal placement when using both interfaces, but, at 2 L/min, the inhaled dose was lower with proximal placement. With a jet nebulizer, the tracheostomy collar generated a higher inhaled dose at proximal placement compared with the T-piece, whereas the T-piece resulted in a higher inhaled dose than the tracheostomy collar with distal placement, regardless of the flow settings. Compared with conventional nebulization using a vibrating mesh nebulizer, an in-line vibrating mesh nebulizer with a large-volume nebulizer at 2 L/min had a similar inhaled dose, regardless of nebulizer placement and interface. In contrast, the in-line jet nebulizer was influenced by both placement and interface.

CONCLUSIONS

Aerosol delivery with an in-line vibrating mesh nebulizer and jet nebulizer with unheated humidification was affected by nebulizer placement, interface, and gas flow settings.

The Effects of Inspiratory Flows, Inspiratory Pause, and Suction Catheter on Aerosol Drug Delivery with Vibrating Mesh Nebulizers During Mechanical Ventilation

Background: Some experts recommend specific ventilator settings during nebulization for mechanically ventilated patients, such as inspiratory pause, high inspiratory to expiratory ratio, and so on. However, it is unclear whether those settings improve aerosol delivery. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the impact of ventilator settings on aerosol delivery during mechanical ventilation (MV). Methods: Salbutamol (5.0 mg/2.5 mL) was nebulized by a vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN) in an adult MV model. VMN was placed at the inlet of humidifier and 15 cm away from the Y-piece of the inspiratory limb. Eight scenarios with different ventilator settings were compared with endotracheal tube (ETT) connecting 15 cm from the Y-piece, including tidal volumes of 6-8 mL/kg, respiratory rates of 12-20 breaths/min, inspiratory time of 1.0-2.5 seconds, inspiratory pause of 0-0.3 seconds, and bias flow of 3.5 L/min. In-line suction catheter was utilized in two scenarios. Delivered drug distal to the ETT was collected by a filter, and drug was assayed by an ultraviolet spectrophotometry (276 nm). Results: Compared to the use of inspiratory pause, the inhaled dose without inspiratory pause was either higher or similar across all ventilation settings. Inhaled dose was negatively correlated with inspiratory flow with VMN placed at 15 cm away from the Y-piece (rs = -0.68, p < 0.001) and at the inlet of humidifier (rs = -0.83, p < 0.001). The utilization of in-line suction catheter reduced inhaled dose, regardless of the ventilator settings and nebulizer placements. Conclusions: When VMN was placed at the inlet of humidifier, directly connecting the Y-piece to ETT without a suction catheter improved aerosol delivery. In this configuration, the inhaled dose increased as the inspiratory flow decreased, inspiratory pause had either no or a negative impact on aerosol delivery. The inhaled dose was greater with VMN placed at the inlet of humidifier than 15 cm away the Y-piece.

Bronchodilator Efficacy of High-Flow Nasal Cannula in COPD: Vibrating Mesh Nebulizer Versus Jet Nebulizer

BACKGROUND

Jet nebulizers are commonly used for bronchodilator therapy in COPD. High-flow nasal cannula with vibrating mesh nebulizer (HFNC-VMN) is a recently developed system; however, few studies have compared the efficacy of bronchodilator administration via HFNC-VMN to jet nebulizer in stable COPD. This study aimed to compare the effect of salbutamol administered via HFNC-VMN versus jet nebulizer on airway and lung function in subjects with stable COPD.

METHODS

This randomized non-inferiority crossover physiologic study enrolled subjects with stable COPD. Salbutamol was nebulized via HFNC-VMN or jet nebulizer in random order with a 4-h washout period between crossover sequences. Spirometry, lung volume, and impulse oscillometry were performed at baseline and after each intervention. The primary outcome was change in FEV1 from baseline. Secondary outcomes included changes in other respiratory-related parameters and nebulization time compared between the 2 devices.

RESULTS

Seventeen subjects were enrolled. HFNC-VMN and jet nebulizer both significantly improved FEV1 from baseline (P = .005 and P = .002, respectively). The difference between respiratory resistance at 5 Hz and 20 Hz significantly decreased after HFNC-VMN compared to baseline (P = .02), while no significant change was observed after jet nebulizer (P = .056). Area of reactance and resonant frequency of reactance were both significantly decreased (P = .035 and P = .03, respectively), and respiratory reactance at 5 Hz significantly increased (P = .02) in the HFNC-VMN group compared to baseline indicating improved lung mechanics, with no significant changes with the jet nebulizer. HFNC-VMN had a shorter nebulization time (6 [5-9] min vs 20 [16-22] min, respectively, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Bronchodilator therapy via HFNC-VMN was not inferior to jet nebulizer for subjects with stable COPD and can significantly improve airway oscillometry mechanics and decrease nebulization time compared to jet nebulizer.

Response to Bronchodilators Administered via Different Nebulizers in Patients With COPD Exacerbation

BACKGROUND

The recommended treatment of COPD exacerbations includes administration of short-acting bronchodilators that act to reverse bronchoconstriction, restore lung volumes, and relieve breathlessness. In vitro studies demonstrate vibrating mesh nebulizers (VMNs) provide greater drug delivery to the airway compared to standard small-volume nebulizers (SVNs). We examined whether the physiological and symptom response to nebulized bronchodilators during a COPD exacerbation differed between these 2 modes of bronchodilator delivery.

METHODS

Subjects hospitalized with a COPD exacerbation participated in a comparative clinical effectiveness study of 2 methods of nebulization. Using block randomization, 32 participants in this open-label trial were administered salbutamol 2.5 mg/ipratropium bromide 0.5 mg via vibrating mesh (VMN group, n = 16) or small-volume jet nebulizer (SVN group, n = 16) on one occasion. Spirometry, body plethysmography, and impulse oscillometry were performed and Borg breathlessness scores recorded pre bronchodilator and at 1 h post bronchodilator.

RESULTS

Baseline demographics were comparable between groups. Mean FEV1 was 48% predicted. Significant changes in lung volumes and airway impedance were seen in both groups. Inspiratory capacity (IC) increased by 0.27 ± 0.20 L and 0.21 ± 0.20 L in the VMN and SVN group, respectively, between group difference P = .40. FVC increased in the VMN group by 0.41 ± 0.40 L compared to 0.19 ± 0.20 L with SVN, between group difference P = .053; and residual volume (RV) decreased by 0.36 ± 0.80 L and 0.16 ± 0.50 L in the VMN and SVN group, respectively, between group difference P = .41. The VMN group had a significant reduction in Borg breathlessness score, P = .034.

CONCLUSIONS

Greater improvement in symptoms, and larger absolute change in FVC, was observed in response to equivalent doses of standard bronchodilators administered by VMN, compared to SVN, but no substantial difference in change in IC.

The Use of an Inspiration-Synchronized Vibrating Mesh Nebulizer for Prolonged Inhalative Iloprost Administration in Mechanically Ventilated Patients-An In Vitro Model

Mechanically ventilated patients suffering from acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) frequently receive aerosolized iloprost. Because of prostacyclin's short half-life, prolonged inhalative administration might improve its clinical efficacy. But, this is technically challenging. A solution might be the use of inspiration-synchronized vibrating mesh nebulizers (VMNsyn), which achieve high drug deposition rates while showing prolonged nebulization times. However, there are no data comparing prolonged to bolus iloprost nebulization using a continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMNcont) and investigating the effects of different ventilation modes on inspiration-synchronized nebulization. Therefore, in an in vitro model of mechanically ventilated adults, a VMNsyn and a VMNcont were compared in volume-controlled (VC-CMV) and pressure-controlled continuous mandatory ventilation (PC-CMV) regarding iloprost deposition rate and nebulization time. During VC-CMV, the deposition rate of the VMNsyn was comparable to the rate obtained with the VMNcont, but 10.9% lower during PC-CMV. The aerosol output of the VMNsyn during both ventilation modes was significantly lower compared to the VMNcont, leading to a 7.5 times longer nebulization time during VC-CMV and only to a 4.2 times longer nebulization time during PC-CMV. Inspiration-synchronized nebulization during VC-CMV mode therefore seems to be the most suitable for prolonged inhalative iloprost administration in mechanically ventilated patients.

Aerosolized Pulmonary Delivery of mRNA Constructs Attenuates Severity of Escherichia coli Pneumonia in the Rat

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a rapid onset inflammatory lung disease with no effective specific therapy, typically has pathogenic etiology termed pneumonia. In previous studies nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) inhibitor α super-repressor (IκBα-SR) and extracellular superoxide dismutase 3 (SOD3) reduced pneumonia severity when prophylactically delivered by viral vector. In this study, mRNA coding for green fluorescent protein, IκBα-SR, or SOD3 was complexed with cationic lipid, passed through a vibrating mesh nebulizer, and delivered to cell culture or directly to rats undergoing Escherichia coli pneumonia. Injury level was then assessed at 48 h. In vitro, expression was observed as early as 4 h in lung epithelial cells. IκBα-SR and wild-type IκBα mRNAs attenuated inflammatory markers, while SOD3 mRNA induced protective and antioxidant effects. In rat E. coli pneumonia, IκBα-SR mRNA reduced arterial carbon dioxide (pCO2) and reduced lung wet/dry ratio. SOD3 mRNA improved static lung compliance and alveolar-arterial oxygen gradient (AaDO2) and decreased bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) bacteria load. White cell infiltration and inflammatory cytokine concentrations in BAL and serum were reduced by both mRNA treatments compared to scrambled mRNA controls. These findings indicate nebulized mRNA therapeutics are a promising approach to ARDS therapy, with rapid expression of protein and observable amelioration of pneumonia symptoms.

Not all nebulizers are created equal: Considerations in choosing a nebulizer for aerosol delivery during mechanical ventilation

INTRODUCTION

Aerosol therapy is commonly prescribed in the mechanically ventilated patient. Jet nebulizers (JN) and vibrating mesh nebulizers (VMN) are the most common nebulizer types, however, despite VMN's well established superior performance, JN use remains the most commonly used of the two. In this review, we describe the key differentiators between nebulizer types and how considered selection of nebulizer type may enable successful therapy and the optimization of drug/device combination products.

AREAS COVERED

Following a review of the published literature up to February 2023, the current state of the art in relation to JN and VMN is discussed under the headings of in vitro performance of nebulizers during mechanical ventilation, respective compatibility with formulations for inhalation, clinical trials making use of VMN during mechanical ventilation, distribution of nebulized aerosol throughout the lung, measuring the respective performance of nebulizers in the patient and non-drug delivery considerations in nebulizer choice.

EXPERT OPINION

Whether for standard care, or the development of drug/device combination products, the choice of nebulizer type should not be made without consideration of the unique needs of the combination of each of drug, disease and patient types, as well as target site for deposition, and healthcare professional and patient safety.

Aerosol delivery through high-flow nasal therapy: Technical issues and clinical benefits

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) therapy is an oxygen delivery method particularly used in patients affected by hypoxemic respiratory failure. In comparison with the conventional "low flow" oxygen delivery systems, it showed several important clinical benefits. The possibility to nebulize drugs via HFNC represents a desirable medical practice because it allows the administration of inhaled drugs, mostly bronchodilators, without the interruption or modification of the concomitant oxygen therapy. HFNC, by itself has shown to exert a small but significant bronchodilator effect and improves muco-ciliary clearance; thus, the nebulization of bronchodilators through the HFNC circuit may potentially increase their pharmacological activity. Several technical issues have been observed which include the type of the nebulizer that should be used, its position within the HFNC circuit, and the optimal gas flow rates to ensure an efficient drug delivery to the lungs both in "quiet" and "distressed" breathing patterns. The aim of this review has been to summarize the scientific evidence coming from "in vitro" studies and to discuss the results of "in vivo" studies performed in adult subjects, mainly affected by obstructive lung diseases. Most studies seem to indicate the vibrating mesh nebulizer as the most efficient type of nebulizer and suggest to place it preferentially upstream from the humidifier chamber. In a quite breathing patterns, the inhaled dose seems to increase with lower flow rates while in a "distressed" breathing pattern, the aerosol delivery is higher when gas flow was set below the patient's inspiratory flow, with a plateau effect seen when the gas flow reaches approximately 50% of the inspiratory flow. Although several studies have demonstrated that the percentage of the loaded dose nebulized via HFNC reaching the lungs is small, the bronchodilator effect of albuterol seems not to be impaired when compared to the conventional inhaled delivery methods. This is probably attributed to its pharmacological activity. Prospective and well-designed studies in different cohort of patients are needed to standardize and demonstrate the efficacy of the procedure.

Aerosol release, distribution, and prevention during aerosol therapy: a simulated model for infection control

Aerosol therapy is used to deliver medical therapeutics directly to the airways to treat respiratory conditions. A potential consequence of this form of treatment is the release of fugitive aerosols, both patient derived and medical, into the environment and the subsequent exposure of caregivers and bystanders to potential viral infections. This study examined the release of these fugitive aerosols during a standard aerosol therapy to a simulated adult patient. An aerosol holding chamber and mouthpiece were connected to a representative head model and breathing simulator. A combination of laser and Schlieren imaging was used to non-invasively visualize the release and dispersion of fugitive aerosol particles. Time-varying aerosol particle number concentrations and size distributions were measured with optical particle sizers at clinically relevant positions to the simulated patient. The influence of breathing pattern, normal and distressed, supplemental air flow, at 0.2 and 6 LPM, and the addition of a bacterial filter to the exhalation port of the mouthpiece were assessed. Images showed large quantities of fugitive aerosols emitted from the unfiltered mouthpiece. The images and particle counter data show that the addition of a bacterial filter limited the release of these fugitive aerosols, with the peak fugitive aerosol concentrations decreasing by 47.3-83.3%, depending on distance from the simulated patient. The addition of a bacterial filter to the mouthpiece significantly reduces the levels of fugitive aerosols emitted during a simulated aerosol therapy, p≤ .05, and would greatly aid in reducing healthcare worker and bystander exposure to potentially harmful fugitive aerosols.

Pharmacokinetic Characteristics of Nebulized Colistimethate Sodium Using Two Different Types of Nebulizers in Critically Ill Patients with Ventilator-Associated Respiratory Infections

Background: Rising antimicrobial resistance has led to a revived interest in inhaled colistin treatment in the critically ill patient with ventilator-associated respiratory infection (VARI). Nebulization via vibrating mesh nebulizers (VMNs) is considered the current standard-of-care, yet the use of generic jet nebulizers (JNs) is more widespread. Few data exist on the intrapulmonary pharmacokinetics of colistin when administered through VMNs, while there is a complete paucity regarding the use of JNs. Methods: In this study, 18 VARI patients who received 2 million international units of inhaled colistimethate sodium (CMS) through a VMN were pharmacokinetically compared with six VARI patients who received the same drug dose through a JN, in the absence of systemic CMS administration. Results: Surprisingly, VMN and JN led to comparable formed colistin exposures in the epithelial lining fluid (ELF) (median (IQR) AUC0-24: 86.2 (46.0-185.9) mg/L∙h with VMN and 91.5 (78.1-110.3) mg/L∙h with JN). The maximum ELF concentration was 10.4 (4.7-22.6) mg/L and 7.4 (6.2-10.3) mg/L, respectively. Conclusions: Based on our results, JN might be considered a viable alternative to the theoretically superior VMN. Therapeutic drug monitoring in the ELF can be advised due to the observed low exposure, high variability, and appreciable systemic absorption.

Position of different nebulizer types for aerosol delivery in an adult model of mechanical ventilation

Background

The optimal positions of different types of nebulizer for aerosol delivery remain unclear.

Methods

Three ICU ventilators employing three types of nebulizer were separately connected to a simulated lung to simulate nebulization during invasive ventilation. Assist/control-pressure control (A/C-PC) mode was utilized, with inspiratory pressure (Pi) set to 12 cmH₂O and positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP) set to 5 cmH₂O, and with a target Vt of 500 ml. The bias flow of all the ventilators was set to 2 L/min. The three nebulizers were the continuous jet nebulizer (c-JN), the inspiratory synchronized jet nebulizer (i-JN), and the vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN). The five nebulizer positions were as follows: at the Y-piece (position 1) and 15 cm from the Y-piece (position 2) between the endotracheal tube and the Y-piece, at the Y-piece (position 3) and 15 cm from the Y-piece (position 4) in the inspiratory limb; and at the humidifier inlet (position 5). Aerosols were collected with a disposable filter placed at the simulated lung outlet (n = 3) and were measured by UV spectrophotometry (276 nm). The measurements were compared under different experimental conditions.

Results

The aerosol delivery of c-JN, i-JN, and VMN was 5.33 ± 0.49~11.12 ± 0.36%, 7.73 ± 0.76~13.75 ± 0.46% and 11.13 ± 56–30.2 ± 1.63%, respectively. The higher aerosol delivery: for c-JN~Positions 2 (10.95 ± 0.15%), fori-JN~Positions 1 or 2 (12.91 ± 0.88% or 13.45 ± 0.42%), for VMN~Positions 4(29.03 ± 1.08%); the lower aerosol delivery: for c-JN~Positions 1, 3 or 5, fori-JN~Positions 4 or 5, for VMN~Positions 5.

The highest aerosol delivery:For c-JN at Position 2 (10.95 ± .15%), for i-JN at Position 1 or 2 (12.91 ± .88% or 13.45 ± .42%), for VMN at Positions 4 (29. 03 ± 1.08%); the lower aerosol delivery: for c-JN at Positions 1, 3 or 5, for i-JN at Positions 4 or 5, for VMN at Positions 5. The highest aerosol deliveryof c-JN was lower than that of i-JN while the VMN was the highest (all P < .05). However, no differences were observed between the highest aerosol delivery with c-JN and the lowest aerosol delivery with i-JN. Similar results were found between the lowest aerosol delivery with VMN and the highest aerosol delivery with c-JN /i-JN in the Avea ventilator. There were no differences in the highest aerosol delivery of each nebulizer among the different ventilators (all p > 0.05).

Conclusion

During adult mechanical ventilation, the type and position of nebulizer influences aerosol delivery efficiency, with no differences between ventilators.

In-Vitro Comparison of Single Limb and Dual Limb Circuit for Aerosol Delivery via Noninvasive Ventilation

BACKGROUND

The effect of single- and dual-limb circuits on aerosol delivery during noninvasive ventilation (NIV) in adult models is unclear.

METHODS

A noninvasive ventilator equipped with a single-limb circuit or an ICU ventilator equipped with a dual-limb circuit was connected to a simulated lung. Ventilator parameters were adjusted to maintain a tidal volume at ∼500 mL. Aerosol deposition with different placements of a vibrating mesh nebulizer and humidification conditions were compared. Additional experiments by using a non-vented mask or a vented mask were compared in the single-limb circuit only. Aerosol was collected by a disposable filter placed between the simulated lung and the head model (n = 3), and measured by ultraviolet spectrophotometry (276 nm).

RESULTS

The aerosol deposition varied between 4.12 ± 0.22% and 20.75 ± 0.95%. The greatest aerosol delivery during NIV when using a non-vented mask was found when a vibrating mesh nebulizer was placed between the mask and 15 cm from the exhalation port in the humidified single-limb circuit, and 15 cm from the Y-piece in the inspiratory limb of the humidified dual-limb circuit, and no significant difference of aerosol deposition was found between the two optimal positions (20.03 ± 1.48% vs 18.04 ± 0.93%, respectively; P =.042). There was no difference of aerosol delivery in dry versus humidified circuits, except when a vibrating mesh nebulizer was placed at the humidifier inlet in a dual-limb circuit. When using a vented mask, the aerosol deposition was poor (6.56 ± 0.41 ∼ 8.02 ± 0.39%), regardless of vibrating mesh nebulizer positions and humidification types.

CONCLUSIONS

During NIV, the aerosol delivery was optimal when a vibrating mesh nebulizer was placed between the non-vented mask and 15 cm from the exhalation port in the single-limb circuit or 15 cm from the Y-piece in the inspiratory limb of the dual-limb circuit; no significant difference was found between the two optimal placements. Humidification had little effect on aerosol delivery. Aerosol delivery was poor in the single-limb circuit with a vented mask.

Aerosol Delivery via Continuous High-Frequency Oscillation During Mechanical Ventilation

BACKGROUND

As the use of continuous high-frequency oscillation combined with nebulization during mechanical ventilation becomes more prevalent clinically, it is important to evaluate its aerosol delivery efficacy.

METHODS

A bench study was conducted that simulated 2 adult and 2 pediatric conditions. A continuous high-frequency oscillation device integrated into the inspiratory limb of a conventional critical care ventilator was attached to an endotracheal tube (ETT) with a collection filter and test lung. High-frequency oscillation with high-flow setting was used with jet nebulizers attached to the manifold, and a vibrating mesh nebulizer placed between the ETT and the ventilator circuit versus at the inlet of the humidifier. Albuterol (2.5 mg in 3 mL) was nebulized for each condition (no. = 3). The drug was eluted from the collection filter and assayed with ultraviolet spectrophotometry (276 nm).

RESULTS

During continuous high-frequency oscillation, the mean inhaled dose with jet nebulizers was low (<2% with the adult settings and <1% with the pediatric settings). Across both adult and pediatric conditions, when the vibrating mesh nebulizer was placed between the ETT and the Y-piece during continuous high-frequency oscillation, the inhaled dose was higher than with the placement of the vibrating mesh nebulizer at the inlet of the humidifier, median 11.1% (IQR 7.0%-13.7%) median 6.0% (IQR 3.9%-7.2%) (P = .002) respectively, but still lower than the inhaled dose with the vibrating mesh nebulizer placed at the inlet of the humidifier with continuous high-frequency oscillation off, median 22.7% (IQR 19.5%-25.4%) versus median 11.1% (IQR 7.0%-13.7%) (P < .001). The inhaled dose with the 10-year-old scenario was higher than with the 5-year-old scenario in all settings except aerosol delivery via continuous high-frequency oscillation.

CONCLUSIONS

During invasive mechanical ventilation with continuous high-frequency oscillation, aerosol delivery with jet nebulizers in the manifold resulted in a marginal inhaled dose. The vibrating mesh nebulizer at the ETT during continuous high-frequency oscillation delivered 6-fold more aerosol than did the jet nebulizer, while delivering only half of the inhaled dose with the vibrating mesh nebulizer placed at the inlet of the humidifier without continuous high-frequency oscillation.

Does Valved Holding Chamber Improve Aerosol Lung Deposition with a Jet Nebulizer? A Randomized Crossover Study

Using valved holding chambers (VHC) during aerosol therapy has been reported to improve the inhaled dose with various aerosol devices, including vibrating mesh nebulizers. The aim of this study was to quantify the pulmonary deposition of a jet nebulizer (JN) with and without a VHC, and a mesh nebulizer (MN) with a VHC in a randomized cross-over trial with seven healthy consenting adults. Our hypothesis was that the use of a VHC would improve deposition with the JN. Diethylnitriaminopentacetic acid with technetium (DTPA-Tc99m), with the activity of 1 mC with 0.9% saline solution was nebulized. The radiolabeled aerosol was detected by 2D planar scintigraphy after administration. The pulmonary deposition was greater with a JN with a VHC (4.5%) than a JN alone (3.2%; p = 0.005. However, an MN with a VHC (30.0%) was six-fold greater than a JN or JN with a VHC (p < 0.001). The extrapulmonary deposition was higher in the JN group without a VHC than in the other two modalities (p < 0.001). Deposition in the device was greater with a JN + VHC than an MN+/VHC (p < 0.001). Lower residual drug at the end of the dose was detected with an MN than either JN configuration. The exhaled dose was greater with a JN alone than either an MN or JN with VHC (p < 0.001). In conclusion, the addition of the VHC did not substantially improve the efficiency of aerosol lung deposition over a JN alone.

Preliminary bronchodilator dose effect on aerosol-delivery through different nebulizers in noninvasively ventilated COPD patients

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a preliminary bronchodilator dose on the aerosol-d elivery by different nebulizers in noninvasively ventilated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Method: COPD patients were randomized to receive study doses of 800 µg beclomethasone dipropionate (BPD) nebulized by either a vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN) or a jet nebulizer (JN) connected to MinimHal spacer device. On a different day, the nebulized dose of beclomethasone was given to each patient by the same aerosol generator with and without preceded two puffs (100 µg each) of salbutamol delivered by a pressurized-metered dose inhaler. Urinary BPD and its metabolites in 30 min post-inhalation samples and pooled up to 24 h post-inhalation were measured. On day 2, ex-vivo studies were performed with BPD collected on filters before reaching patients which were eluted from filters and analyzed to estimate the total emitted dose.Results: The highest urinary excretion amounts of BPD and its metabolites 30 min and 24 h post-inhalation were identified with pMDI + VMN compared with other regimens(p < 0.001). The amounts of BPD and its metabolites excreted 30 min post inhalation had approximately doubled with pMDI + JN compared with JN delivery (p < 0.05). No significant effect was found in the ex-vivo study results except between VMN and JN with a significant superiority of the VMN (p < 0.001).Conclusion: Using a preliminary bronchodilator dose before drug nebulization significantly increased the effective lung dose of the nebulized drug with both VMNs and JNs. However, adding a preliminary bronchodilator dose increased the 24 hr cumulative urinary amount of the drug representing higher systemic delivery of the drug, which in turn could result in higher systemic side effects.

Particle Dynamics and Bioaerosol Viability of Aerosolized Bacillus Calmette-Guérin Vaccine Using Jet and Vibrating Mesh Clinical Nebulizers

Background: Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) is a vaccine used to protect against tuberculosis primarily in infants to stop early infection in areas of the world where the disease is endemic. Normally administered as a percutaneous injection, BCG is a live significantly attenuated bacteria that is now being investigated for its potential within an inhalable vaccine formulation. This study investigates the feasibility and performance of two jet and two vibrating mesh nebulizers aerosolizing BCG and the resulting particle characteristics and residual viability of the bacteria postaerosolization. Methods: A jet nebulizer (Collison), outfitted either with a 3- or 6-jet head, was compared with two clinical nebulizers, the vibrating mesh Omron MicroAir and Aerogen Solo devices. Particle characteristics, including aerodynamic particle sizing, was performed on all devices within a common aerosol chamber configuration and comparable BCG innocula concentrations. Integrated aerosol samples were collected for each generator and assayed for bacterial viability using conventional microbiological technique. Results: A batch lot of BCG (Danish) was grown to titer and used in all generator assessments. Aerosol particles within the respirable range were generated from all nebulizers at four different concentrations of BCG. The jet nebulizers produced a uniformly smaller particle size than the vibrating mesh devices, although particle concentrations by mass were similar across all devices tested with the exception of the Aerogen Solo, which resulted in a low concentration of BCG aerosols. Conclusions: The resulting measured viable BCG aerosol concentration fraction produced by each device approximated one another; however, a measurable decrease of efficiency and overall viability reduction in the jet nebulizer was observed in higher BCG inoculum starting concentrations, whereas the vibrating mesh nebulizer returned a remarkably stable viable aerosol fraction irrespective of inoculum concentration.

Unexpected Interruptions in the Inhaled Epoprostenol Delivery System: Incidence of Adverse Sequelae and Therapeutic Consequences in Critically Ill Patients

OBJECTIVES

Inhaled epoprostenol is a continuously delivered selective pulmonary vasodilator that is used in patients with refractory hypoxemia, right heart failure, and postcardiac surgery pulmonary hypertension. Published data suggest that inhaled epoprostenol administration via vibrating mesh nebulizer systems may lead to unexpected interruptions in drug delivery. The frequency of these events is unknown. The objective of this study was to describe the incidence and clinical consequences of unexpected interruption in critically ill patients.

DESIGN

Retrospective review and analysis.

SETTING

Stanford University Hospital, a 605-bed tertiary care center.

PATIENTS

Patients receiving inhaled epoprostenol in 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

No interventions.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Clinical indication, duration of inhaled epoprostenol delivery, mode of respiratory support, and documented unexpected interruption. In 2019, there were 493 administrations of inhaled epoprostenol in 433 unique patients. Primary indications for inhaled epoprostenol were right heart dysfunction (n = 394; 79.9%) and hypoxemia (n = 92; 18.7%). Unexpected delivery interruptions occurred in 31 administrations (6.3%). Median duration of therapy prior to unexpected interruption was 2 days (interquartile range, 2-5 d). Respiratory support at the time of unexpected interruption was mechanical ventilation (61.3%), high-flow nasal cannula (35.5%), and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (3.2%). Adverse sequelae of unexpected interruption included elevated pulmonary artery pressures (n = 12), systemic hypotension (n = 8), hypoxemia (n = 8), elevated central venous pressure (n = 4), and cardiac arrest (n = 1). Therapeutic interventions following unexpected interruption included initiation of inhaled nitric oxide (n = 21), increase in vasoactive medication (n = 2), and increase in respiratory support (n = 2). Most of the adverse events were Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 and 4 (93.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

A retrospective review of patients receiving inhaled epoprostenol via vibrating mesh nebulizer in 2019 revealed interruptions in 6.3% of administrations with most of these interruptions requiring therapeutic intervention. The true incidence of unexpected interruption and subsequent rate of unexpected interruption's requiring intervention is unknown due to the reliance on unexpected interruption identification and subsequent documentation in the electronic medical record. Sudden interruption in inhaled epoprostenol delivery can result in severe cardiopulmonary compromise, and on rare occasion, death.

In Vitro Evaluation of Aerosol Delivery by Hand-Held Mesh Nebulizers in an Adult Spontaneous Breathing Lung Model

Background: Drug inhalation is common mode of treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of aerosol devices in a simulated COPD adult lung model using five commercially available hand-held mesh nebulizers. Materials and Methods: Five nebulizers (PARI VELOX^®, Omron NE-U22, Aeroneb^® Go, APEX PY001, and Pocket Air^®) were tested with a unit dose of 5.0 mg/2.5 mL salbutamol. An in vitro lung model (compliance: 0.06 L/cm H₂O, resistance: 20 cm H₂O/L/sec) was constructed to simulate parameters (tidal volume of 500 mL, respiratory rate of 15 breaths/min, inspiratory time of 1 second) of an adult patient with COPD. A bacterial filter was attached at the bronchi level for drug collection, referring as inhaled mass. After nebulization, the inhaled mass (%), dose remaining on each component (%), particle size characteristics, and nebulizer performances were analyzed. Particle size characteristics were analyzed using an 8-stage Anderson Cascade Impactor. The salbutamol particles deposited were eluted and analyzed using a spectrophotometer at 276 nm. The inhaled mass (%), dose remaining on each component (%), particle size distribution, and nebulizer performance were statistically analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Sheffee post hoc tests. Results: Pocket Air and APEX PY001 showed the greatest inhaled mass and the lowest dose in the mouthpiece connection. The largest and smallest mass median aerodynamic diameters were found with Omron NE-U22 and PARI VELOX, respectively. In addition, the output rate and inhaled aerosol rate (IAR) of PARI VELOX were higher than those of other nebulizers. Conclusions: This study showed that the performance of commercially available mesh nebulizers varied. Aerosol particles deposited on different auxiliary equipment directly influenced the output rate and IAR of the mesh nebulizer. Clinical validation of the drug IAR is necessary to avoid overdose and reduce drug wastage.

Utility of Three Nebulizers in Investigating the Infectivity of Airborne Viruses

Laboratory-generated bioaerosols are widely used in aerobiology studies of viruses; however, few comparisons of alternative nebulizers exist. We compared aerosol production and virus survival for a Collison nebulizer, vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN), and hydraulic spray atomizer (HSA). We also measured the dry size distribution of the aerosols produced and calculated the droplet sizes before evaporation and the dry size distribution from normal saline solution. Dry count median diameters of 0.11, 0.22, and 0.30 μm were found for normal saline from the Collison nebulizer, VMN, and HSA, respectively. The volume median diameters were 0.323, 1.70, and 1.30 μm, respectively. The effect of nebulization on the viability of two influenza A viruses (IAVs) (H1N1 and H3N2) and human rhinovirus 16 (HRV-16) was assessed by nebulization into an SKC BioSampler. The HSA had the least impact on surviving fractions (SFs) of H1N1 and H3N2 (89% ± 3% and 94% ± 2%, respectively), followed by the Collison nebulizer (83% ± 1% and 82% ± 2%, respectively). The VMN yielded SFs of 78% ± 2% and 76% ± 2%, respectively. Conversely, for HRV-16, the VMN produced higher SFs (87% ± 8%). Our findings indicate that there were no statistical differences between SFs of the viruses nebulized by these nebulizers. However, VMN produced higher aerosol concentrations within the airborne size range, making it more suitable where high aerosol mass production is required. IMPORTANCE Viral respiratory tract infections cause millions of lost days of work and physician visits globally, accounting for significant morbidity and mortality. Respiratory droplets and droplet nuclei from infected hosts are the potential carriers of such viruses within indoor environments. Laboratory-generated bioaerosols are applied in understanding the transmission and infection of viruses, modeling the physiological aspects of bioaerosol generation in a controlled environment. However, little comparative characterization exists for nebulizers used in infectious disease aerobiology, including Collison nebulizer, vibrating mesh nebulizer, and hydraulic spray atomizer. This study characterized the physical features of aerosols generated by laboratory nebulizers and their performance in producing aerosols at a size relevant to airborne transmission used in infectious disease aerobiology. We also determined the impact of nebulization mechanisms of these nebulizers on the viability of human respiratory viruses, including IAV H1N1, IAV H3N2, and HRV-16.

An in vitro visual study of fugitive aerosols released during aerosol therapy to an invasively ventilated simulated patient

COVID-19 can cause serious respiratory complications resulting in the need for invasive ventilatory support and concurrent aerosol therapy. Aerosol therapy is considered a high risk procedure for the transmission of patient derived infectious aerosol droplets. Critical-care workers are considered to be at a high risk of inhaling such infectious droplets. The objective of this work was to use noninvasive optical methods to visualize the potential release of aerosol droplets during aerosol therapy in a model of an invasively ventilated adult patient. The noninvasive Schlieren imaging technique was used to visualize the movement of air and aerosol. Three different aerosol delivery devices: (i) a pressurized metered dose inhaler (pMDI), (ii) a compressed air driven jet nebulizer (JN), and (iii) a vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN), were used to deliver an aerosolized therapeutic at two different positions: (i) on the inspiratory limb at the wye and (ii) on the patient side of the wye, between the wye and endotracheal tube, to a simulated intubated adult patient. Irrespective of position, there was a significant release of air and aerosol from the ventilator circuit during aerosol delivery with the pMDI and the compressed air driven JN. There was no such release when aerosol therapy was delivered with a closed-circuit VMN. Selection of aerosol delivery device is a major determining factor in the release of infectious patient derived bioaerosol from an invasively mechanically ventilated patient receiving aerosol therapy.

The Effect of Different Interfaces on the Aerosol Delivery with Vibrating Mesh Nebulizer During Noninvasive Positive Pressure Ventilation

Background: The effect of different interfaces on the aerosol delivery with vibrating mesh nebulizer during noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIV) is not clear. Materials and Methods: Noninvasive ventilator and four interfaces were connected to IngMar ASL 5000 lung simulator. Meanwhile, the vibrating mesh nebulizer was connected to a ventilator circuit to simulate the nebulization during noninvasive ventilation. The nebulizer position was placed at proximal position (near the mask) and distal position (15 cm away from the mask); the inspiratory positive airway pressure (IPAP) and the expiratory positive airway pressure (EPAP) were set to 16/4, 16/8, 20/4, and 20/8 cmH₂O, respectively. The aerosol was collected through a disposable filter placed between the simulated lung and the mask, after which the aerosol delivery was calculated. Meanwhile, we recorded the inspiratory tidal volume and the mean inspiratory flow. Results: The aerosol delivery varied between 1.7% ± 0.0% and 21.1% ± 1.1%. Only when EPAP was set to 4 cmH₂O, the statistical difference in aerosol delivery was observed between the two types of interface, and between different leak port locations (p < 0.01; p = 0.04, respectively). When IPAP/EPAP was set to 16/4 and 20/4 cmH₂O, respectively, at different nebulizer positions, there was a statistical difference between the interface with the same type but different leak port locations and between the interface with same leak port location but different inner volumes (all p < 0.01). Also, there was a correlation between the aerosol delivery and interface volume (p < 0.01, R² = 0.55; p < 0.01, R² = 0.51, respectively), and between aerosol delivery and the intentional leak of interfaces (p < 0.01, R² = 0.59; p < 0.01, R² = 0.48, respectively). When EPAP was set to 4 and 8 cmH₂O, respectively, the aerosol delivery of nebulizer distal position was significantly higher than that of proximal position (12.2% ± 5.0% vs. 9.1% ± 4.1%, p < 0.05; 2.5% ± 0. 5% vs. 2.1% ± 0.3%, p < 0.01, respectively). Conclusion: Interfaces have a significant effect on aerosol delivery during NIV. The interfaces with different inner volumes, intentional leak, and leak port location may all have an effect on aerosol delivery. The addition of a 15 cm tube between the nebulizer and the mask significantly increases the aerosol delivery.

Quantifying continuous nebulization via high flow nasal cannula and large volume nebulizer in a pediatric model

BACKGROUND

Use of high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) to deliver aerosolized medications to children has gained considerable interest. However, data on continuous albuterol delivery (CAD) via HFNC are lacking. This study quantified CAD via HFNC/vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN) and large-volume jet nebulizer (LVN) with face mask (FM) in a pediatric model. Aerosol delivery with two HFNC cannula designs were also compared.

METHODS

A pediatric manikin was connected to a lung simulator (Vt = 150 mL, RR = 28 breaths/minute, I:E 1:2.4) via collecting filter at the carina. XL Pediatric and SML Adult HFNC designs were tested to determine optimal cannula design for CAD. VMN was placed Before humidifier (37°C), albuterol (5 mg/mL) was nebulized at 3, 6, and 12 L/minute (n = 3). To compare HFNC/VMN with LVN and FM, albuterol (15 mg/hour) was aerosolized for 3 hours/device (n = 3). LVN was connected to FM and filled with 9 mL of albuterol (5 mg/mL) and 66 mL of normal saline to deliver 25 mL/hour at 13 L/minute. VMN was connected to the infusion pump to deliver 7.5 mL/hr of albuterol (2 mg/mL). Drug eluted from filters was assayed with UV spectrophotometry (276 nm).

RESULTS

Optimal aerosol delivery occurred at 3 L/minute (12.6% ± 0.5%) with SML Adult HFNC (P = .04). When used for CAD, inhaled drug delivery with HFNC/VMN (2.2 mg/hr ± 0.1, 14.8% ± 0.7%) was significantly greater than LVN and FM (0.48 ± 0.09 mg/hour, 3.2% ± 0.6%) (P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of CAD via HFNC/VMN led to a greater than fourfold increase in drug delivery compared to LVN with FM. Optimal aerosol delivery occurred at 3 L/minute with SML Adult HFNC.

Future Trends in Nebulized Therapies for Pulmonary Disease

Aerosol therapy is a key modality for drug delivery to the lungs of respiratory disease patients. Aerosol therapy improves therapeutic effects by directly targeting diseased lung regions for rapid onset of action, requiring smaller doses than oral or intravenous delivery and minimizing systemic side effects. In order to optimize treatment of critically ill patients, the efficacy of aerosol therapy depends on lung morphology, breathing patterns, aerosol droplet characteristics, disease, mechanical ventilation, pharmacokinetics, and the pharmacodynamics of cell-drug interactions. While aerosol characteristics are influenced by drug formulations and device mechanisms, most other factors are reliant on individual patient variables. This has led to increased efforts towards more personalized therapeutic approaches to optimize pulmonary drug delivery and improve selection of effective drug types for individual patients. Vibrating mesh nebulizers (VMN) are the dominant device in clinical trials involving mechanical ventilation and emerging drugs. In this review, we consider the use of VMN during mechanical ventilation in intensive care units. We aim to link VMN fundamentals to applications in mechanically ventilated patients and look to the future use of VMN in emerging personalized therapeutic drugs.

Health-Related Effects of Home Nebulization With Glycopyrronium on Difficult-to-Treat Asthma: Post-Hoc Analyses of an Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Bronchial asthma remains a clinical enigma with poorly controlled symptoms or exacerbations despite regular use of inhaled corticosteroids. Home nebulization offers a simplified solution for the delivery of rescue and maintenance bronchodilators, which is especially true for patients with frequent exacerbations during management of uncontrolled or difficult-to-treat asthma.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the clinical impact and outcomes associated with home nebulization-delivered long-acting bronchodilators for uncontrolled or difficult-to-treat asthma.

METHODS

This observational, concurrent study was conducted with 60 patients at 2 centers during November 2018. Statistical analyses for prebronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) asthma control score in patients on long-acting bronchodilators and corticosteroids were conducted, with two-tailed P values <.05 considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Per protocol analyses (53/60) for consecutive cases receiving home nebulization with long-acting bronchodilators and corticosteroids were conducted. The baseline demographics included a male-to-female ratio of 30:23 and mean values of the following: age, 60.3 years (SD 11.8 years); weight, 64 kg (SD 16.8 kg); FEV1, 43% (SD 16%); GINA asthma control score, 3.0 points (SD 0.8 points); serum eosinophil level, 4% (SD 3%); fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), 12.1 ppb (SD 6 ppb). Of the patients, 100% (53/53) had uncontrolled symptoms, 69.8% (37/53) had prior exacerbations, 100% (53/53) used formoterol/budesonide, and 75.5% (40/53) used glycopyrronium. The per protocol group (n=53) had significantly improved mean prebronchodilator FEV1 (23.7%, SD 29.8%; 0.46 L, SD 0.58 L; P<.001) and GINA asthma control score (2.1 points, SD 0.8 points, P<.001). At baseline, patients (n=40) receiving glycopyrronium/formoterol/budesonide (25/20/500 mcg) nebulization admixture had the following mean values: prebronchodilator FEV1, 38% (SD 15%); GINA asthma control score, 3.0 points (SD 0.8 points); reversibility, 12% (SD 6%); peripheral eosinophil level, 4% (SD 3%); FeNO, 12 ppb (SD 5.7 ppb). In the post hoc analyses, these patients had significantly improved mean prebronchodilator FEV1 of 27.7% (SD 26.2%; 0.54 L, SD 0.51 L; P<.001) at 8 weeks compared with baseline. At baseline, patients (n=13) receiving formoterol/budesonide (20/500 mcg) nebulization had the following mean values: FEV1, 55% (SD 12%); GINA asthma control score, 3.0 points (SD 1.2 points); reversibility, 14% (SD 7%); serum eosinophil level, 4% (SD 3%); FeNO, 13.3 ppb (SD 6.8 ppb). In the post hoc analyses, these patients showed a significant improvement in prebronchodilator FEV1 of 11.2% (SD 13.1%; 0.22 L, SD 0.25 L; P<.001) from baseline. Breathlessness of mild to moderate intensity was reported by 10 cases (10/53, 18.9%), with no other treatment-emergent adverse events or serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Home nebulization remains a viable option for symptomatic difficult-to-treat asthma cases with frequent use of rescue medications. Glycopyrronium as add-on therapy offers a synergistic response in patients on corticosteroids with difficult-to-treat asthma.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trial Registry of India CTRI/2018/11/016319; https://tinyurl.com/y78cctm3.

Nebulized Mesenchymal Stem Cell Derived Conditioned Medium Retains Antibacterial Properties Against Clinical Pathogen Isolates

Background: Mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) have demonstrated promise in pathogenic acute respiratory distress syndrome models and are advancing to clinical efficacy testing. Besides immunomodulatory effects, MSC derived conditioned medium (CM) has direct antibacterial effects, possibly through LL-37 and related secreted peptide activity. We investigated MSC-CM compatibility with vibrating mesh technology, allowing direct delivery to the infected lung. Methods: MSC-CM from bone marrow (BM) and umbilical cord (UC) MSCs were passed through the commercially available Aerogen Solo nebulizer. Known colony forming units of Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, and multidrug resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae clinical isolates were added to MSC-CM in an orbital shaker and antibacterial capacity assessed through OD600 spectrophotometry. To exclude the possible effects of medium depletion on bacteria proliferation, MSC-CM was concentrated with a 3000 Da cutoff filter, diluted with fresh media, and retested against inoculum. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used to quantify levels of antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) and IL-8 present at pre- and postnebulization. Results: Both BM and UC MSC-CM inhibited proliferation of all pathogens, and this ability was retained after nebulization. Concentrating and reconstituting CM did not affect antibacterial properties. Interestingly, LL-37 protein did not appear to survive nebulization, although other secreted AMPs and an unrelated protein, IL-8, were largely intact. Conclusion: MSC-CM is a potent antimicrobial agent and is compatible with vibrating mesh nebulization delivery. The mechanism is through a secreted factor that is over 3000 Da in size, although it does not appear to rely solely on previously identified peptides such as LL-37, hepcidin, or lipocalin-2.

Aerosol Delivery During Continuous High Frequency Oscillation for Simulated Adults During Quiet and Distressed Spontaneous Breathing

BACKGROUND

Continuous high-frequency oscillation (CHFO) is a therapeutic mode for the mobilization of secretions. The Metaneb CHFO device also incorporates aerosol administration using an integrated jet nebulizer. However, the effectiveness of aerosol delivery and influential factors remain largely unreported.

METHODS

A collecting filter was placed between an adult manikin with a representative upper airway and a breath simulator, set to simulate quiet and distressed patterns of spontaneous adult breathing. The Metaneb CHFO device was attached to the manikin via a mask. Two jet nebulizers were tested in 2 different positions: placement in the manifold and placement between manifold and mask. A vibrating mesh nebulizer was placed between the manifold and mask with and without extension tubing. Aerosol administration was compared during CHFO and during nebulization mode alone. Albuterol (2.5 mg in 3 mL) was nebulized for each condition. The drug was eluted from the filter and assayed with ultraviolet spectrophotometry (276 nm).

RESULTS

During CHFO, inhaled doses with jet nebulizers were low (∼ 2%), regardless of nebulizer placement. Inhaled dose was improved with the vibrating mesh nebulizer placed between the manifold and mask (12.48 ± 2.24% vs 2.58 ± 0.48%, P = .004). Inhaled doses with the jet nebulizer in the manifold with nebulization mode alone was lower than with the jet nebulizer with an aerosol mask (4.03 ± 1.82% vs 10.39 ± 2.79%, P = .004). Inhaled dose was greater with distressed breathing than quiet breathing. The use of a vibrating mesh nebulizer (P < .001) and distressed breathing (P = .001) were identified as predictors of increased inhaled dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Inhaled dose with a jet nebulizer via the Metaneb CHFO device was lower than with a jet nebulizer alone. Placement of a vibrating mesh nebulizer at the airway and distressed breathing increased inhaled dose.

Size Distribution of Colistin Delivery by Different Type Nebulizers and Concentrations During Mechanical Ventilation

Although aerosol delivery through mechanical ventilators has been used to administer various medications, little is known of administration with colistin. This in vitro evaluation aimed to evaluate size distribution of colistin delivery by different types of nebulizers and concentrations during mechanical ventilation. Colistin methanesulfonate (colistin) for injection was dissolved in 6 mL of distilled water to produce a low concentration (L; 156 mg) and a high concentration (H; 312 mg). A dose volume of 6 mL was placed in a vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN) and a jet nebulizer (JN). The inhaled mass (mean ± SD) of the VMN-L (53.80 ± 14.79 mg) was greater than both the JN-L (19.82 ± 3.34 mg, P = 0.001) and JN-H (31.72 ± 4.48 mg, P = 0.017). The nebulization time of the VMN-L (42.35 ± 2.30 min) was two times longer than the JN-L (21.12 ± 0.8 min) or JN-H (21.65 ± 0.42 min; P < 0.001). The mass median aerodynamic distal to the endotracheal tube was within a similar range at 2.03 to 2.26 μm (P = 0.434), independent of neb or formulation concentration. In conclusion, the VMN-L yields greater inhaled mass than the JN with either concentration. Therefore, a standard nominal dose of colistin results in a higher delivered dose during mechanical ventilation with a VMN compared with a JN and may be considered the preferred device. If JN must be used, multiple doses of low concentration colistin may compensate for poor delivery performance.

Pulmonary Drug Delivery Following Continuous Vibrating Mesh Nebulization and Inspiratory Synchronized Vibrating Mesh Nebulization During Noninvasive Ventilation in Healthy Volunteers

BACKGROUND

A breath-synchronized nebulization option that could potentially improve drug delivery during noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) is currently not available on single-limb circuit bilevel ventilators. The aim of this study was to compare urinary excretion of amikacin following aerosol delivery with a vibrating mesh nebulizer coupled to a single-limb circuit bilevel ventilator, using conventional continuous (Conti-Neb) and experimental inspiratory synchronized (Inspi-Neb) nebulization modes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A crossover clinical trial involving 6 noninvasive ventilated healthy volunteers (mean age of 32.3 ± 9.5 y) randomly assigned to both vibrating mesh nebulization modes was conducted: Inspi-Neb delivered aerosol during only the whole inspiratory phase, whereas Conti-Neb delivered aerosol continuously. All subjects inhaled amikacin solution (500 mg/4 mL) during NIPPV using a single-limb bilevel ventilator (inspiratory positive airway pressure: 12 cm H₂O, and expiratory positive airway pressure: 5 cm H₂O). Pulmonary drug delivery of amikacin following both nebulization modes was compared by urinary excretion of drug for 24 hours post-inhalation.

RESULTS

The total daily amount of amikacin excreted in the urine was significantly higher with Inspi-Neb (median: 44.72 mg; interquartile range [IQR]: 40.50-65.13) than with Conti-Neb (median: 40.07 mg; IQR: 31.00-43.73), (p = 0.02). The elimination rate constant of amikacin (indirect measure of the depth of drug penetration into the lungs) was significantly higher with Inspi-Neb (median: 0.137; IQR: 0.113-0.146) than with Conti-Neb (median: 0.116; IQR: 0.105-0.130), (p = 0.02). However, the mean pulmonary drug delivery rate, expressed as the ratio between total daily urinary amount of amikacin and nebulization time, was significantly higher with Conti-Neb (2.03 mg/min) than with Inspi-Neb (1.09 mg/min) (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

During NIPPV with a single-limb circuit bilevel ventilator, the use of inspiratory synchronized vibrating mesh nebulization may improve pulmonary drug delivery compared with conventional continuous vibrating mesh nebulization.

Aerosol Delivery Through Adult High Flow Nasal Cannula With Heliox and Oxygen

BACKGROUND

Heliox (helium-oxygen mixture) has been shown to reduce turbulence and improve aerosol delivery in a range of clinical settings. We questioned whether heliox as compared with oxygen via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) would affect aerosol delivery. We hypothesized that heliox would have a significant effect on aerosol delivery as compared with oxygen with both quiet and distressed breathing patterns.

METHODS

A vibrating mesh nebulizer was placed at the inlet of a humidifier via HFNC with small adult cannula distal to the heated-wire circuit with prongs placed into simulated nares with a T-shaped trap and absolute filter connected to a breath simulator set to adult quiet and distressed breathing parameters. Albuterol sulfate (0.083% 2.5 mg/3 mL) was aerosolized with heliox (80:20) and oxygen (100%) at 10, 30, and 50 L/min. Drug eluted from the filter was assayed with UV spectrophotometry (276 nm). Descriptive statistics, Kruskal-Wallis test, and Mann-Whitney U test were used for data analysis. P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Increasing flows with heliox and oxygen significantly decreased percentage inhaled dose (inhaled dose) of aerosol with a quiet breathing pattern (P = .02 and P = .030, respectively). In contrast, with a distressed breathing pattern, inhaled dose at 10 L/min was lower than at 30 and 50 L/min (P = .009 and P = .01, respectively) with both oxygen and heliox (P = .009 and P = .009, respectively). Despite a trend to higher aerosol deposition with heliox versus oxygen, the differences were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

With a distressed breathing pattern, aerosol delivery was greater at 30 and 50 L/min than with a quiet breathing pattern. Trends toward higher inhaled dose with heliox during HFNC were not significant.

In Vitro Comparison of a Vibrating Mesh Nebulizer Operating in Inspiratory Synchronized and Continuous Nebulization Modes During Noninvasive Ventilation

Backround: Coupling nebulization with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) has been shown to be effective in patients with respiratory diseases. However, a breath-synchronized nebulization option that could potentially improve drug delivery by limiting drug loss during exhalation is currently not available on bilevel ventilators. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare aerosol delivery of amikacin with a vibrating mesh nebulizer coupled to a single-limb circuit bilevel ventilator, using conventional continuous (Conti-Neb) and experimental inspiratory synchronized (Inspi-Neb) nebulization modes.

METHODS

Using an adult lung bench model of NIV, we tested a vibrating mesh device coupled with a bilevel ventilator in both nebulization modes. Inspi-Neb delivered aerosol only during the whole inspiratory phase, whereas Conti-Neb delivered aerosol continuously. The nebulizer was charged with amikacin solution (250 mg/3 mL) and placed at two different positions: between the lung and exhalation port and between the ventilator and exhalation port. Inhaled, expiratory wasted and circuit lost doses were assessed by residual gravimetric method. Particle size distribution of aerosol delivered at the outlet of the ventilator circuit during both nebulization modes was measured by laser diffraction method.

RESULTS

Regardless of the nebulizer position, Inspi-Neb produced higher inhaled dose (p < 0.01; +6.3% to +16.8% of the nominal dose), lower expiratory wasted dose (p < 0.05; -2.7% to -42.6% of the nominal dose), and greater respirable dose (p < 0.01; +8.4% to +15.2% of the nominal dose) than Conti-Neb. The highest respirable dose was found with the nebulizer placed between the lung and exhalation port (48.7% ± 0.3% of the nominal dose).

CONCLUSIONS

During simulated NIV with a single-limb circuit bilevel ventilator, the use of inspiratory synchronized vibrating mesh nebulization improves respirable dose and reduces drug loss of amikacin compared with continuous vibrating mesh nebulization.

Characterization of Ribavirin Aerosol With Small Particle Aerosol Generator and Vibrating Mesh Micropump Aerosol Technologies

BACKGROUND

Ribavirin is an antiviral drug that can be administered by inhalation. Despite advancements in the oral delivery of this medication, there has been a renewed interested in delivering ribavirin via the pulmonary system. Although data are not conclusive that inhaled ribavirin improves outcomes, we set out to determine whether delivery by a newer generation nebulizer, the vibrating mesh micropump, was as effective as the recommended small-particle aerosol generator system.

METHODS

We compared the physicochemical makeup and concentrations of ribavirin before and after nebulization with 0.9% NaCl and sterile water. An Andersen cascade impactor was used to determine particle size distribution and mass median aerodynamic diameter, and an absolute filter was used to measure total aerosol emitted output and inhaled dose during mechanical ventilation and spontaneous breathing. Ribavirin was analyzed and quantified using high-performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometric detection.

RESULTS

Ribavirin was found to be stable in both 0.9% aqueous NaCl and sterile water with an r(2) value of 0.96 and identical coefficients of variation with no difference in drug concentration before and after nebulization with the vibrating mesh micropump. The small-particle aerosol generator produced a smaller mass median aerodynamic diameter (1.84 μm) than the vibrating mesh micropump (3.63 μm, P = .02); however, there was no significant difference in the proportion of drug mass in the 0.7-4.7-μm particle range. Total drug delivery was similar with the small-particle aerosol generator and vibrating mesh micropump in both spontaneously breathing (P = .77) and mechanical ventilation (P = .48) models.

CONCLUSIONS

The vibrating mesh micropump nebulizer may provide an effective alternative to the small-particle aerosol generator in administration of ribavirin using NaCl or sterile water, both on and off the ventilator. Further clinical studies are needed to compare efficacy.

Optimization and Dose Estimation of Aerosol Delivery to Non-Human Primates

BACKGROUND

In pre-clinical animal studies, the uniformity of dosing across subjects and routes of administration is a crucial requirement. In preparation for a study in which aerosolized live-attenuated measles virus vaccine was administered to cynomolgus monkeys (Macaca fascicularis) by inhalation, we assessed the percentage of a nebulized dose inhaled under varying conditions.

METHODS

Drug delivery varies with breathing parameters. Therefore we determined macaque breathing patterns (tidal volume, breathing frequency, and inspiratory to expiratory (I:E) ratio) across a range of 3.3-6.5 kg body weight, using a pediatric pneumotachometer interfaced either with an endotracheal tube or a facemask. Subsequently, these breathing patterns were reproduced using a breathing simulator attached to a filter to collect the inhaled dose. Albuterol was nebulized using a vibrating mesh nebulizer and the percentage inhaled dose was determined by extraction of drug from the filter and subsequent quantification.

RESULTS

Tidal volumes ranged from 24 to 46 mL, breathing frequencies from 19 to 31 breaths per minute and I:E ratios from 0.7 to 1.6. A small pediatric resuscitation mask was identified as the best fitting interface between animal and pneumotachometer. The average efficiency of inhaled dose delivery was 32.1% (standard deviation 7.5, range 24%-48%), with variation in tidal volumes as the most important determinant.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies in non-human primates aimed at comparing aerosol delivery with other routes of administration should take both the inter-subject variation and relatively low efficiency of delivery to these low body weight mammals into account.

Effect of Tidal Volume and Nebulizer Type and Position on Albuterol Delivery in a Pediatric Model of Mechanical Ventilation

BACKGROUND

Optimization of factors affecting aerosol delivery during mechanical ventilation in the pediatric population is important. We hypothesized that increasing the tidal volume (V(T)), using a vibrating mesh nebulizer, and placing the nebulizer at the ventilator would increase lung dose/delivery efficiency.

METHODS

Continuous-output jet and vibrating mesh nebulizers loaded with albuterol (2.5 mg/3 mL) were compared when placed before the Y-piece and at the ventilator. The model consisted of a ventilator operated in pressure-regulated volume control ventilation mode at a breathing frequency of 20 breaths/min, PEEP of 5 cm H2O, FIO2 of 0.4, inspiratory time of 0.75 s, and bias flow of 0.5 L/min with a humidifier (37 ± 1.5°C) and an adult heated-wired circuit. V(T) values of 100, 150, 200, and 300 mL were studied. The circuit was connected in series to a 5.5-mm inner diameter endotracheal tube with a filter (lung dose) interposed between them. Delivery efficiency was calculated as a percentage of the nominal dose captured on the filter. Albuterol content was analyzed by spectrophotometry (276 nm).

RESULTS

No differences in lung dose/delivery efficiency were found at different V(T) values for the jet nebulizer (both positions) and the vibrating mesh nebulizer (ventilator). Lung dose/delivery efficiency was higher (P < .02) at a VT of 100 mL compared with the other volumes tested. The vibrating mesh nebulizer had higher lung dose/delivery efficiency compared with the jet nebulizer only when placed before the Y-piece. Moving the nebulizers from before the Y-piece to the ventilator increased lung dose/delivery efficiency for all conditions tested except the vibrating mesh nebulizer at a V(T) of 100 mL (P = .36).

CONCLUSIONS

Optimization of inhaled drug delivery during pediatric mechanical ventilation should include careful selection of the type of delivery device and its placement in the ventilator circuit. Increasing V(T) during nebulization did not increase lung dose/delivery efficiency.

Early-stage development of novel cyclodextrin-siRNA nanocomplexes allows for successful postnebulization transfection of bronchial epithelial cells

BACKGROUND

Successful delivery of small interfering RNA (siRNA) to the lungs remains hampered by poor intracellular delivery, vector-mediated cytotoxicity, and an inability to withstand nebulization. Recently, a novel cyclodextrin (CD), SC12CDClickpropylamine, consisting of distinct lipophilic and cationic subunits, has been shown to transfect a number of cell types. However, the suitability of this vector for pulmonary siRNA delivery has not been assessed to date. To address this, a series of high-content analysis (HCA) and postnebulization assays were devised to determine the potential for CD-siRNA delivery to the lungs.

METHODS

SC12CDClickpropylamine-siRNA mass ratios (MRs) were examined for size and zeta potential. In-depth analysis of nanocomplex uptake and toxicity in Calu-3 bronchial epithelial cells was examined using IN Cell(®) HCA assays. Nebulized SC12CDClickpropylamine nanocomplexes were assessed for volumetric median diameter (VMD) and fine particle fraction (FPF) and compared with saline controls. Finally, postnebulization stability was determined by comparing luciferase knockdown elicited by SC12CDClickpropylamine nanocomplexes before and after nebulization.

RESULTS

SC12CDClickpropylamine-siRNA complexation formed cationic nanocomplexes of ≤200 nm in size depending on the medium and led to significantly higher levels of siRNA associated with Calu-3 cells compared with RNAiFect-siRNA-treated cells at all MRs (p<0.001, n=3×4), with evidence of toxicity only at MRs 50-100. Nebulization of SC12CDClickpropylamine nanocomplexes using the Aeroneb(®) Pro resulted in VMDs of ∼4 μm and FPFs of ∼57% at all MRs. SC12CDClickpropylamine-siRNA-mediated luciferase knockdown was found to be 39.8±3.6% at MR=20 before and 35.6±4.55% after nebulization, comparable to results observed using unnebulized commercial transfection reagent, RNAiFect.

CONCLUSIONS

SC12CDClickpropylamine nanocomplexes can be effectively nebulized for pulmonary delivery of siRNA using Aeroneb technology to mediate knockdown in airway cells. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study examining the suitability of SC12CDClickpropylamine-siRNA nanocomplexes for pulmonary delivery. Furthermore, this work provides an integrated nanomedicine-device combination for future in vitro and in vivo preclinical and clinical studies of inhaled siRNA therapeutics.

In vitro comparison of five nebulizers during noninvasive ventilation: analysis of inhaled and lost doses

BACKGROUND

Few studies on performance comparison of nebulizer systems coupled with a single-limb circuit bilevel ventilator are available. Most of these data compared the aerosol drug delivery for only two different systems. Using an adult lung bench model of noninvasive ventilation, we compared inhaled and lost doses of three nebulizer systems coupled with a single-limb circuit bilevel ventilator, as well as the influence of the nebulizer position.

METHOD

Three vibrating mesh nebulizers (Aeroneb(®) Pro, Aeroneb(®) Solo, and NIVO(®)), one jet nebulizer (Sidestream(®)), and one ultrasonic nebulizer (Servo Ultra Nebulizer 145(®)) coupled with a bilevel ventilator were tested. They were charged with amikacin solution (500 mg/4 mL) and operated at two different positions: before and after the exhalation port (starting from the lung). The inhaled dose, the expiratory wasted dose, and the estimated lost dose were assessed by the residual gravimetric method.

RESULTS

The doses varied widely among the nebulizer types and position. When the nebulizer was positioned before the exhalation port, the vibrating mesh nebulizer delivered the highest inhaled dose (p<0.001), the jet nebulizer the highest expiratory wasted dose (p<0.001), and the ultrasonic device the highest total lost dose (p<0.001). When the nebulizer was positioned after the exhalation port, the vibrating mesh nebulizers delivered the highest inhaled (p<0.001) and expiratory wasted doses (p<0.001), and the ultrasonic device the highest total lost dose (p<0.001). The most efficient nebulizers were NIVO and Aeroneb Solo when placed before the exhalation port.

CONCLUSIONS

In a single-limb circuit bilevel ventilator, vibrating mesh nebulizers positioned between the exhalation port and lung model are more efficient for drug delivery compared with jet or ultrasonic nebulizers. In this position, the improved efficiency of vibrating mesh nebulizers was due to an increase in the inhaled dose and a reduction in the exhaled wasted dose compared with placement between the ventilator and the expiratory port. Because of the high total lost dose, the ultrasonic device should not be recommended. Nebulizer placement before the exhalation port increased the inhaled dose and decreased the expiratory wasted dose, except for the jet nebulizer.

Physicochemical aspects and efficiency of albuterol nebulization: comparison of three aerosol types in an in vitro pediatric model

BACKGROUND

Advances in nebulizer design have produced both ultrasonic nebulizers and devices based on a vibrating mesh (vibrating mesh nebulizers), which are expected to enhance the efficiency of aerosol drug therapy. The aim of this study was to compare 4 different nebulizers, of 3 different types, in an in vitro model using albuterol delivery and physical characteristics as benchmarks.

METHODS

The following nebulizers were tested: Sidestream Disposable jet nebulizer, Multisonic Infra Control ultrasonic nebulizer, and the Aerogen Pro and Aerogen Solo vibrating mesh nebulizers. Aerosol duration, temperature, and drug solution osmolality were measured during nebulization. Albuterol delivery was measured by a high-performance liquid chromatography system with fluorometric detection. The droplet size distribution was analyzed with a laser granulometer.

RESULTS

The ultrasonic nebulizer was the fastest device based on the duration of nebulization; the jet nebulizer was the slowest. Solution temperature decreased during nebulization when the jet nebulizer and vibrating mesh nebulizers were used, but it increased with the ultrasonic nebulizer. Osmolality was stable during nebulization with the vibrating mesh nebulizers, but increased with the jet nebulizer and ultrasonic nebulizer, indicating solvent evaporation. Albuterol delivery was 1.6 and 2.3 times higher with the ultrasonic nebulizer and vibrating mesh nebulizers devices, respectively, than with the jet nebulizer. Particle size was significantly higher with the ultrasonic nebulizer.

CONCLUSIONS

The in vitro model was effective for comparing nebulizer types, demonstrating important differences between nebulizer types. The new devices, both the ultrasonic nebulizers and vibrating mesh nebulizers, delivered more aerosolized drug than traditional jet nebulizers.