Cargando…
In vitro comparison between inspiration synchronized and continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer during trans-nasal aerosol delivery
BACKGROUND: Compared to continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN), inspiration synchronized VMN has shown increased inhaled dose during noninvasive ventilation; however, its use during aerosol delivery via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is still unknown. METHODS: An adult manikin was connected to a...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6994578/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32006290 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40635-020-0293-7 |
_version_ | 1783493221368725504 |
---|---|
author | Li, Jie Wu, Wei Fink, James B. |
author_facet | Li, Jie Wu, Wei Fink, James B. |
author_sort | Li, Jie |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Compared to continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN), inspiration synchronized VMN has shown increased inhaled dose during noninvasive ventilation; however, its use during aerosol delivery via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is still unknown. METHODS: An adult manikin was connected to a dual-chamber model lung, which was driven by a critical care ventilator to simulate spontaneous breathing. A HFNC system was utilized with temperature at 37 ° C while gas flow at 5, 10, 20, 40, and 60 L/min. Inspiration synchronized and continuous aerosol generation were compared at different positions (at the inlet of humidifier vs close to patient). One milliliter of albuterol (2.5 mg/mL) was used in each run (n = 3). Collection filter was placed at the trachea and was removed after each run. Drug was eluted from the filter and assayed with UV spectrophotometry (276 nm). RESULTS: When nebulizer was placed close to patient, inhaled dose was higher with inspiration synchronized than continuous aerosol generation at all gas flows (p = 0.05) except at 5 L/min. When placed at the inlet of humidifier, compared to continuous, inspiration synchronized aerosol generated higher inhaled dose with gas flow set below 50% of patient inspiratory flow [23.9 (20.6, 28.3)% vs 18.1 (16.7, 19.6)%, p < 0.001], but lower inhaled dose with gas flow set above 50% of patient inspiratory flow [3.5 (2.2, 9.3)% vs 9.9 (8.2, 16.4)%, p = 0.001]. Regardless of breathing pattern, continuous aerosol delivered greater inhaled dose with nebulizer placed at humidifier than close to patient at all gas flows except at 5 L/min. CONCLUSION: When the HFNC gas flow was set higher than 50% of patient inspiratory flow, no significant advantage was found in inspiration synchronized over continuous aerosol. However, inspiration synchronized aerosol generated 30% more inhaled dose than continuous with gas flow set below 50% of patient inspiratory flow, regardless of nebulizer placement. Continuous nebulizer needs to be placed at the inlet of humidifier. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6994578 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69945782020-02-14 In vitro comparison between inspiration synchronized and continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer during trans-nasal aerosol delivery Li, Jie Wu, Wei Fink, James B. Intensive Care Med Exp Research BACKGROUND: Compared to continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN), inspiration synchronized VMN has shown increased inhaled dose during noninvasive ventilation; however, its use during aerosol delivery via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is still unknown. METHODS: An adult manikin was connected to a dual-chamber model lung, which was driven by a critical care ventilator to simulate spontaneous breathing. A HFNC system was utilized with temperature at 37 ° C while gas flow at 5, 10, 20, 40, and 60 L/min. Inspiration synchronized and continuous aerosol generation were compared at different positions (at the inlet of humidifier vs close to patient). One milliliter of albuterol (2.5 mg/mL) was used in each run (n = 3). Collection filter was placed at the trachea and was removed after each run. Drug was eluted from the filter and assayed with UV spectrophotometry (276 nm). RESULTS: When nebulizer was placed close to patient, inhaled dose was higher with inspiration synchronized than continuous aerosol generation at all gas flows (p = 0.05) except at 5 L/min. When placed at the inlet of humidifier, compared to continuous, inspiration synchronized aerosol generated higher inhaled dose with gas flow set below 50% of patient inspiratory flow [23.9 (20.6, 28.3)% vs 18.1 (16.7, 19.6)%, p < 0.001], but lower inhaled dose with gas flow set above 50% of patient inspiratory flow [3.5 (2.2, 9.3)% vs 9.9 (8.2, 16.4)%, p = 0.001]. Regardless of breathing pattern, continuous aerosol delivered greater inhaled dose with nebulizer placed at humidifier than close to patient at all gas flows except at 5 L/min. CONCLUSION: When the HFNC gas flow was set higher than 50% of patient inspiratory flow, no significant advantage was found in inspiration synchronized over continuous aerosol. However, inspiration synchronized aerosol generated 30% more inhaled dose than continuous with gas flow set below 50% of patient inspiratory flow, regardless of nebulizer placement. Continuous nebulizer needs to be placed at the inlet of humidifier. Springer International Publishing 2020-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC6994578/ /pubmed/32006290 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40635-020-0293-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Research Li, Jie Wu, Wei Fink, James B. In vitro comparison between inspiration synchronized and continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer during trans-nasal aerosol delivery |
title | In vitro comparison between inspiration synchronized and continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer during trans-nasal aerosol delivery |
title_full | In vitro comparison between inspiration synchronized and continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer during trans-nasal aerosol delivery |
title_fullStr | In vitro comparison between inspiration synchronized and continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer during trans-nasal aerosol delivery |
title_full_unstemmed | In vitro comparison between inspiration synchronized and continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer during trans-nasal aerosol delivery |
title_short | In vitro comparison between inspiration synchronized and continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer during trans-nasal aerosol delivery |
title_sort | in vitro comparison between inspiration synchronized and continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer during trans-nasal aerosol delivery |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6994578/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32006290 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40635-020-0293-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lijie invitrocomparisonbetweeninspirationsynchronizedandcontinuousvibratingmeshnebulizerduringtransnasalaerosoldelivery AT wuwei invitrocomparisonbetweeninspirationsynchronizedandcontinuousvibratingmeshnebulizerduringtransnasalaerosoldelivery AT finkjamesb invitrocomparisonbetweeninspirationsynchronizedandcontinuousvibratingmeshnebulizerduringtransnasalaerosoldelivery |