In Vitro Study of the Effect of Breathing Pattern on Aerosol Delivery During High-Flow Nasal Therapy

Performance Characterisation of the Airvo2TM Nebuliser Adapter in Combination with the Aerogen SoloTM Vibrating Mesh Nebuliser for in Line Aerosol Therapy during High Flow Nasal Oxygen Therapy

High flow oxygen (HFO) therapy is a well-established treatment in respiratory disease. Concurrent aerosol delivery can greatly expediate their recovery. The aim of this work was to complete a comprehensive characterisation of one such HFO therapy system, the Airvo2TM, used in combination with the Aerogen SoloTM vibrating mesh nebuliser. Representative adult, infant, and paediatric head models were connected to a breathing simulator via a collection filter placed at the level of the trachea. A tracheostomy interface and nasal cannulas were used to deliver the aerosol. Cannula size and gas flow rate were varied across the full operating range recommended by the manufacturer. The tracheal and emitted doses were quantified via UV-spectrophotometry. The aerosol droplet diameter at the exit of the nares and tracheal interface was measured via cascade impaction. High gas flow rates resulted in low emitted and tracheal doses (%). Nasal cannula size had no significant effect on the tracheal dose (%) available in infant and paediatric models. Higher gas flow rates resulted in smaller aerosol droplets at the exit of the nares and tracheostomy interface. Gas flow rate was found to be the primary parameter affecting aerosol delivery. Thus, gas flow rates should be kept low and where possible, delivered using larger nasal cannulas to maximise aerosol delivery.

Comparison of the Application of Vibrating Mesh Nebulizer and Jet Nebulizer in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective

To comparison of the application of Vibrating Mesh Nebulizer and Jet Nebulizer in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Research Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statements. The primary outcome measures analyzed included: The amount of inhaler in the urine sample at 30 minutes after inhalation therapy (USAL0.5), The total amount of inhaler in urine sample within 24 hours (USAL24), Aerosol emitted, Forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), Forced vital capacity (FVC).

Results

Ten studies were included with a total of 314 study participants, including 157 subjects in the VMN group and 157 subjects in the JN group. The data analysis results of USAL0.5, MD (1.88 [95% CI, 0.95 to 2.81], P = 0.000), showed a statistically significant difference. USAL24, MD (1.61 [95% CI, 1.14 to 2.09], P = 0.000), showed a statistically significant difference. The results of aerosol emitted showed a statistically significant difference in MD (3.44 [95% CI, 2.84 to 4.04], P = 0.000). The results of FEV1 showed MD (0.05 [95% CI, -0.24 to 0.35], P=0.716), the results were not statistically significant. The results of FVC showed MD (0.11 [95% CI, -0.18 to 0.41], P=0.459), the results were not statistically significant. It suggests that VMN is better than JN and provides higher aerosols, but there is no difference in improving lung function between them.

Conclusion

VMN is significantly better than JN in terms of drug delivery and utilization in the treatment of patients with COPD. However, in the future use of nebulizers, it is important to select a matching nebulizer based on a combination of factors such as mechanism of action of the nebulizer, disease type and comorbidities, ventilation strategies and modes, drug formulations, as well as cost-effectiveness, in order to achieve the ideal treatment of COPD.

Evaluation of antibody drug delivery efficiency via nebulizer in various airway models and breathing patterns

BACKGROUND

Nebulizers are commonly used to treat respiratory diseases, which are a major cause of morbidity and mortality. While inhalation therapy with antibodies has been evaluated in preclinical studies and clinical trials for respiratory diseases, it has not yet been approved for treatment. Moreover, there is limited information regarding the delivery efficiency of therapeutic antibodies via nebulizer.

METHODS

In this study, the nebulization characteristics and drug delivery efficiencies were compared when immunoglobulin G (IgG) was delivered by five nebulizers using two airway models and five breathing patterns. The study confirmed that the delivered dose and drug delivery efficiency were reduced in the child model compared to those in the adult model and in the asthma pattern compared to those in the normal breathing pattern.

RESULTS

The NE-SM1 NEPLUS vibrating mesh nebulizer demonstrated the highest delivery efficiency when calculated as a percentage of the loading dose, whereas the PARI BOY SX + LC SPRINT (breath-enhanced) jet nebulizer had the highest delivery efficiency when calculated as a percentage of the emitted dose.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that the total inspiration volume, output rate, and particle size should be considered when IgG nebulization is used. We, therefore, propose a method for evaluating the efficiency of nebulizer for predicting antibody drug delivery.

In-Line Aerosol Therapy via Nasal Cannula during Adult and Paediatric Normal, Obstructive, and Restrictive Breathing

High-flow nasal oxygen therapy is being increasingly adopted in intensive and home care settings. The concurrent delivery of aerosolised therapeutics allows for the targeted treatment of respiratory illnesses. This study examined in-line aerosol therapy via a nasal cannula to simulated adult and paediatric models with healthy, obstructive and restrictive lung types. The Aerogen Solo vibrating mesh nebuliser was used in combination with the InspiredTM O2FLO high-flow therapy system. Representative adult and paediatric head models were connected to a breathing simulator, which replicated several different states of lung health. The aerosol delivery was quantified at the tracheal level using UV-spectrophotometry. Testing was performed at a range of supplemental gas flow rates applicable to both models. Positive end-expiratory pressure was measured pre-, during and post-nebulisation. The increases in supplemental gas flow rates resulted in a decrease in aerosol delivery, irrespective of lung health. Large tidal volumes and extended inspiratory phases were associated with the greatest aerosol delivery. Gas flow to inspiratory flow ratios of 0.29-0.5 were found to be optimum for aerosol delivery. To enhance aerosol delivery to patients receiving high-flow nasal oxygen therapy, respiratory therapists should keep supplemental gas-flow rates below the inspiratory flow of the patient.

Enhanced Aerosol Delivery During High-Flow Nasal Cannula Therapy

BACKGROUND

Aerosolized drug delivery via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) decreases as gas flow is increased. To improve aerosol delivery, breath-enhanced jet nebulizer may increase aerosol output. This study tested that hypothesis and compared breath-enhanced jet nebulizer to vibrating mesh nebulizer technology.

METHODS

First, in an isolated circuit, breath-enhanced jet nebulizer and vibrating mesh nebulizer aerosol outputs were measured during simulated HFNC by using infused saline solution at rates of 5-60 mL/h. Limits were defined when nebulizer filling was detected. The devices were then tested by using 99mTc/saline solution to measure maximum rates of aerosol production. After the output experiments, drug delivery was measured in vitro by using a model that consisted of an HFNC circuit interfaced to a realistic 3-dimensional printed head. The 99mTc/saline solution was infused at rates of 5 to 60 mL/h for the breath-enhanced jet nebulizer and 5 to 20 mL/h for the vibrating mesh nebulizer with HFNC gas flows of 10 to 60 L/min. Aerosol delivery to the trachea was measured by using a shielded ratemeter, which defined the rate of drug delivery (µg NaCl/min).

RESULTS

With increasing gas flow, breath-enhanced jet nebulizer output increased to a maximum of 50 mL/h, the vibrating mesh nebulizer maximum was 12 mL/h. At HFNC gas flow of 60 L/min, breath-enhanced jet nebulizer delivered 3.16 to 316.8 µg NaCl/min, the vibrating mesh nebulizer delivered 23.5 to 61.7 µg NaCl/min. For infusion pump flows of 5 to 12 mL/h, the rate of drug delivery was independent of nebulizer type (P = .19) and dependent on infusion pump flow (P < .001) and gas flow (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing gas flow increased breath-enhanced jet nebulizer output, which demonstrated the effects of breath enhancement. At 60 L/min, breath enhanced jet nebulizer delivered up to 5 times more aerosol compared with conventional vibrating mesh nebulizer technology. Breath-enhanced jet nebulizer delivered a wide range of dose rates at all high flows. In patients who are critically ill, breath-enhanced jet nebulizer technology may allow titration of bedside dosing based on clinical response by simple adjustment of the infusion rate.

In Vitro Model for Analysis of High-Flow Aerosol Delivery During Continuous Nebulization

BACKGROUND

To understand the fate of aerosols delivered by high-flow nasal cannula using continuous nebulization, an open-source anatomical model was developed and validated with a modified real-time gamma ratemeter technique. Mass balance defined circuit losses. Responsiveness to infusion rate and device technology were tested.

METHODS

A nasal airway cast derived from a computed tomography scan was converted to a 3-dimensional-printed head and face structure connected to a piston ventilator (breathing frequency 30 breaths/min, tidal volume 750 mL, duty cycle 0.50). For mass balance experiments, saline mixed with Technetium-99m was infused for 1 h. Aerosol delivery was measured using a gamma ratemeter oriented to an inhaled mass filter at the hypopharynx of the model. Background and dead-space effects were minimized. All components were imaged by scintigraphy. Continuous nebulization was tested at infusion rates of 10-40 mL/h with gas flow of 60 L/min using a breath-enhanced jet nebulizer (BEJN), and a vibrating mesh nebulizer. Drug delivery rates were defined by the slope of ratemeter counts/min (CPM/min) versus time (min).

RESULTS

The major source of aerosol loss was at the nasal interface (∼25%). Significant differences in deposition on circuit components were seen between nebulizers. The nebulizer residual was higher for BEJN (P = .006), and circuit losses, including the humidifier, were higher for vibrating mesh nebulizer (P = .006). There were no differences in delivery to the filter and head model. For 60 L/min gas flow, as infusion pump flow was increased, the rate of aerosol delivery (CPM/min) increased, for BEJN from 338 to 8,111; for vibrating mesh nebulizer, maximum delivery was 2,828.

CONCLUSIONS

The model defined sites of aerosol losses during continuous nebulization and provided a realistic in vitro system for testing aerosol delivery during continuous nebulization. Real-time analysis can quantify effects of multiple changes in variables (nebulizer technology, infusion rate, gas flow, and ventilation) during a given experiment.

Predicting Inhaled Drug Dose Generated by Mesh Nebulizers

Background: The lung dose of nebulized drugs for spontaneous breathing is influenced by breathing patterns and nebulizer performance. This study aimed to develop a system for measuring breath patterns and a formula for estimating inhaled drugs, and then to validate the hypothesized prediction formula. Methods: An in vitro model was first used to determine correlations among the delivered dose, breath patterns, and doses deposited on the accessories and reservoirs testing with a breathing simulator to generate 12 adult breathing patterns (n = 5). A pressure sensor was developed to measure breathing parameters and used along with a prediction formula that accounted for the initial charge dose, respiratory pattern, and dose on the accessory and reservoir of a nebulizer. Three brands of nebulizers were tested by placing salbutamol (5.0 mg/2.5 mL) in the drug holding chamber. Ten healthy individuals participated in the ex vivo study to validate the prediction formula. The agreement between the predicted and inhaled doses was analyzed using the Bland-Altman plot. Results: The in vitro model showed that the inspiratory time to total respiratory cycle time (Ti/Ttotal; %) was significantly directly correlated with the delivered dose among the respiratory factors, followed by inspiratory flow, respiratory rate, and tidal volume. The ex vivo model showed that Ti/Ttotal was significantly directly correlated with the delivered dose among the respiratory factors, in addition to the nebulization time and accessory dose. The Bland-Altman plots for the ex vivo model showed similar results between the two methods. Large differences in inhaled dose measured at the mouth were observed among the subjects, ranging from 12.68% to 21.68%; however, the difference between the predicted dose and inhaled dose was lower, at 3.98%-5.02%. Conclusions: The inhaled drug dose could be predicted with the hypothesized estimation formula, which was validated by the agreement between the inhaled and predicted doses of breathing patterns of healthy individuals.

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.

Formulation, Device, and Clinical Factors Influencing the Targeted Delivery of COVID-19 Vaccines to the Lungs

The COVID-19 pandemic has proven to be an unprecedented health crisis in the human history with more than 5 million deaths worldwide caused to the SARS-CoV-2 and its variants ( https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019 ). The currently authorized lipid nanoparticle (LNP)-encapsulated mRNA vaccines have been shown to have more than 90% vaccine efficacy at preventing COVID-19 illness (Baden et al. New England J Med 384(5):403-416, 2021; Thomas et al., 2021). In addition to vaccines, other small molecules belonging to the class of anti-viral and anti-inflammatory compounds have also been prescribed to reduce the viral proliferation and the associated cytokine storm. These anti-viral and anti-inflammatory compounds have also been shown to be effective in reducing COVID-19 exacerbations especially in reducing the host inflammatory response to SARS-CoV-2. However, all of the currently FDA-authorized vaccines for COVID-19 are meant for intramuscular injection directly into the systemic circulation. Also, most of the small molecules investigated for their anti-COVID-19 efficacy have also been explored using the intravenous route with a few of them explored for the inhalation route (Ramakrishnan et al. Lancet Respir Med 9:763-772, 2021; Horby et al. N Engl J Med 384(8):693-704, 2021). The fact that the SARS-CoV-2 enters the human body mainly via the nasal and airway route resulting in the lungs being the primary organs of infection as characterized by acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS)-mediated cytokine storm in the alveolar region has made the inhalation route gain significant attention for the purposes of targeting both vaccines and small molecules to the lungs (Mitchell et al., J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv 33(4):235-8, 2020). While there have been many studies reporting the safety and efficacy of targeting various therapeutics to the lungs to treat COVID-19, there is still a need to match the choice of inhalation formulation and the delivery device platform itself with the patient-related factors like breathing pattern and respiratory rate as seen in a clinical setting. In that perspective, this review aims to describe the various formulation and patient-related clinical factors that can play an important role in the judicious choice of the inhalation delivery platforms or devices for the development of inhaled COVID-19 vaccines.

[Can mesh nebulizers improve prehospital aerosol therapy? An in vitro study on simulated prehospital emergency patients suffering from respiratory distress]

BACKGROUND

Nebulizers used to treat prehospital emergency patients should provide a high output efficiency to achieve a fast onset of therapeutic drug effects while remaining unaffected by the presence of supplementary oxygen flow or the patient's breathing pattern. On the other hand, nebulizer performance is directly influenced by differences in device design, gas flow and patients' breathing patterns. Several studies from emergency departments were able to demonstrate an improvement in patient outcome when using a mesh nebulizer instead of a jet nebulizer. Data or bench studies regarding prehospital care are non-existent.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present in vitro study was to evaluate which type of aerosol generator would best address the requirements of a prehospital adult emergency patient suffering from respiratory distress.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We evaluated the performance of a jet nebulizer (Cirrus™ 2, Intersurgical®) and two mesh nebulizers (Aerogen Solo® with USB controller, Aerogen Limited and M‑Neb® mobile, NEBU-TEC International med. Produkte Eike Kern GmbH) with the possibility of portable operation in an in vitro model of a spontaneously breathing adult emergency patient. One physiological and three pathological breathing patterns (distressed breathing pattern as well as stable and acute exacerbated chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) were simulated. Nebulizer output and salbutamol lung deposition were measured at different oxygen flow rates using a face mask as the delivery interface.

RESULTS

The mesh nebulizers produced a significantly higher aerosol output when compared to the jet nebulizer. The M‑Neb® mobile was able to significantly exceed the output of the Aerogen Solo®. Oxygen flow had the largest influence on the output of the jet nebulizer but hardly affected the mesh nebulizers. After a nebulization time of 10 min the M‑Neb® mobile also achieved the highest total salbutamol lung deposition (P < 0.001). Aerosol drug deposition was therefore mainly determined by the nebulizer's drug output per unit time. The deposition could not be improved using a spacer but was strongly influenced by the simulated emergency patients' breathing pattern.

CONCLUSION

The use of mesh nebulizers might have the potential to improve the aerosol therapy of prehospital emergency patients. In general, mesh nebulizers seem to be superior to jet nebulizers regarding aerosol output per unit time and total lung deposition. The present data suggest that aerosol output and drug deposition to the collection filter in this simulated setting are closely connected and crucial for total salbutamol deposition, as the deposition could not be improved by adding a spacer. Aerosol drug deposition in simulated emergency patients' lungs is therefore mainly determined by the nebulizer's drug output per unit time. The level of oxygen flow used had the largest influence on the output of the jet nebulizer but hardly affected the output of the tested mesh nebulizers. Mesh nebulizers could therefore enable a demand-adapted oxygen therapy due to their consistent performance despite the presence of oxygen flow. A high respiratory rate was associated with a high drug deposition, which is clinically desirable in the treatment of patients in respiratory distress; however, drug underdosing must also be expected in the treatment of bradypneic patients. Further clinical studies must prove whether our findings also apply to the treatment of real prehospital emergency patients.

The Impact of Head Model Choice on the In Vitro Evaluation of Aerosol Drug Delivery

There are variations in the values reported for aerosol drug delivery across in vitro experiments throughout the published literature, and often with the same devices or similar experimental setups. Factors contributing to this variability include, but are not limited to device type, equipment settings, drug type and quantification methods. This study assessed the impact of head model choice on aerosol drug delivery using six different adults and three different paediatric head models in combination with a facemask, mouthpiece, and high-flow nasal cannula. Under controlled test conditions, the quantity of drug collected varied depending on the choice of head model. Head models vary depending on a combination of structural design differences, facial features (size and structure), internal volume measurements and airway geometries and these variations result in the differences in aerosol delivery. Of the widely available head models used in this study, only three were seen to closely predict in vivo aerosol delivery performance in adults compared with published scintigraphy data. Further, this testing identified the limited utility of some head models under certain test conditions, for example, the range reported across head models was aerosol drug delivery of 2.62 ± 2.86% to 37.79 ± 1.55% when used with a facemask. For the first time, this study highlights the impact of head model choice on reported aerosol drug delivery within a laboratory setting and contributes to explaining the differences in values reported within the literature.

In vitro delivery efficiencies of nebulizers for different breathing patterns

Background

Nebulizers are medical devices that deliver aerosolized medication directly to lungs to treat a variety of respiratory diseases. However, breathing patterns, respiration rates, airway diameters, and amounts of drugs delivered by nebulizers may be respiratory disease dependent.

Method

In this study, we developed a respiratory simulator consisting of an airway model, an artificial lung, a flow sensor, and an aerosol collecting filter. Various breathing patterns were generated using a linear actuator and an air cylinder. We tested six home nebulizers (jet (2), static (2), and vibrating mesh nebulizers (2)). Nebulizers were evaluated under two conditions, that is, for the duration of nebulization and at a constant output 1.3 mL using four breathing patterns, namely, the breathing pattern specified in ISO 27427:2013, normal adult, asthmatic, and COPD.

Results

One of the vibrating mesh nebulizers had the highest dose delivery efficiency. The drug delivery efficiencies of nebulizers were found to depend on breathing patterns.

Conclusion

We suggest a quantitative drug delivery efficiency evaluation method and calculation parameters that include considerations of constant outputs and residual volumes. The study shows output rates and breathing patterns should be considered when the drug delivery efficiencies of nebulizers are evaluated.

An in vitro investigation into the release of fugitive medical aerosols into the environment during manual ventilation

BACKGROUND

During manual resuscitation, nebulizer therapy may be used to deliver therapeutics to patients in respiratory distress. However, the devices used to generate and deliver these medical aerosols have the potential to release these therapeutics into the local environment and expose caregivers to unwanted medical aerosols.

AIM

To quantify the levels of fugitive medical aerosol released into the environment during aerosol drug delivery using a manual resuscitation bag with and without filtration.

METHODS

Time-varying fugitive aerosol concentrations were measured using an aerodynamic particle sizer placed at a position designed to mimic a caregiver. Two nebulizer types were assessed, a vibrating mesh nebulizer and a jet nebulizer. The aerosol dose delivered to the simulated patient lung was also quantified.

FINDINGS

Filtration of the exhalation port of the manual resuscitation bag was seen to reduce fugitive medical aerosols to ambient levels for both nebulizer types. The vibrating mesh nebulizer delivered the greatest quantity of aerosol to the simulated adult patient (18.44 ± 1.03% versus 3.64 ± 0.26% with a jet nebulizer).

CONCLUSIONS

The results highlight the potential for exposure to fugitive medical aerosols released during the delivery of aerosol therapy with a manual resuscitation bag and also the potential for significant variation in patient lung dose depending on nebulizer type.

An experimental study of respiratory aerosol transport in phantom lung bronchioles

The transport and deposition of micrometer-sized particles in the lung is the primary mechanism for the spread of aerosol borne diseases such as corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19). Considering the current situation, modeling the transport and deposition of drops in human lung bronchioles is of utmost importance to determine their consequences on human health. The current study reports experimental observations on deposition in micro-capillaries, representing distal lung bronchioles, over a wide range of Re that imitates the particle dynamics in the entire lung. The experiment investigated deposition in tubes of diameter ranging from 0.3 mm to 2 mm and over a wide range of Reynolds number (10-2 ⩽ Re ⩽ 103). The range of the tube diameter and Re used in this study is motivated by the dimensions of lung airways and typical breathing flow rates. The aerosol fluid was loaded with boron doped carbon quantum dots as fluorophores. An aerosol plume was generated from this mixture fluid using an ultrasonic nebulizer, producing droplets with 6.5 µm as a mean diameter and over a narrow distribution of sizes. The amount of aerosol deposited on the tube walls was measured using a spectrofluorometer. The experimental results show that dimensionless deposition (δ) varies inversely with the bronchiole aspect ratio (L ¯ ), with the effect of the Reynolds number (Re) being significant only at lowL ¯ . δ also increased with increasing dimensionless bronchiole diameter (D ¯ ), but it is invariant with the particle size based Reynolds number. We show that δ L ¯ ∼ R e - 2 for 10-2 ⩽ Re ⩽ 1, which is typical of a diffusion dominated regime. For Re ⩾ 1, in the impaction dominated regime, δ L ¯ is shown to be independent of Re. We also show a crossover regime where sedimentation becomes important. The experimental results conclude that lower breathing frequency and higher breath hold time could significantly increase the chances of getting infected with COVID-19 in crowded places.

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.

Defining a Regulatory Strategy for ATMP/Aerosol Delivery Device Combinations in the Treatment of Respiratory Disease

Advanced Therapeutic Medicinal Products (ATMP) are a heterogenous group of investigational medicinal products at the forefront of innovative therapies with direct applicability in respiratory diseases. ATMPs include, but are not limited to, stem cells, their secretome, or extracellular vesicles, and each have shown some potential when delivered topically within the lung. This review focuses on that subset of ATMPs. One key mode of delivery that has enabling potential in ATMP validation is aerosol-mediated delivery. The selection of the most appropriate aerosol generator technology is influenced by several key factors, including formulation, patient type, patient intervention, and healthcare economics. The aerosol-mediated delivery of ATMPs has shown promise for the treatment of both chronic and acute respiratory disease in pre-clinical and clinical trials; however, in order for these ATMP device combinations to translate from the bench through to commercialization, they must meet the requirements set out by the various global regulatory bodies. In this review, we detail the potential for ATMP utility in the lungs and propose the nebulization of ATMPs as a viable route of administration in certain circumstances. Further, we provide insight to the current regulatory guidance for nascent ATMP device combination product development within the EU and US.

CFD Guided Optimization of Nose-to-Lung Aerosol Delivery in Adults: Effects of Inhalation Waveforms and Synchronized Aerosol Delivery

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to optimize nose-to-lung aerosol delivery in an adult upper airway model using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations in order to guide subsequent human subject aerosol delivery experiments.

METHODS

A CFD model was developed that included a new high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) and pharmaceutical aerosol delivery unit, nasal cannula interface, and adult upper airway geometry. Aerosol deposition predictions in the system were validated with existing and new experimental results. The validated CFD model was then used to explore aerosol delivery parameters related to synchronizing aerosol generation with inhalation and inhalation flow rate.

RESULTS

The low volume of the new HFNC unit minimized aerosol transit time (0.2 s) and aerosol bolus spread (0.1 s) enabling effective synchronization of aerosol generation with inhalation. For aerosol delivery correctly synchronized with inhalation, a small particle excipient-enhanced growth delivery strategy reduced nasal cannula and nasal depositional losses each by an order of magnitude and enabled ~80% of the nebulized dose to reach the lungs. Surprisingly, nasal deposition was not sensitive to inhalation flow rate due to use of a nasal cannula interface with co-flow inhaled air and the small initial particle size.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of correct aerosol synchronization and small particle size enabled high efficiency nose-to-lung aerosol delivery in adults, which was not sensitive to inhalation flow rate.

A narrative review on trans-nasal pulmonary aerosol delivery

The use of trans-nasal pulmonary aerosol delivery via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has expanded in recent years. However, various factors influencing aerosol delivery in this setting have not been precisely defined, and no consensus has emerged regarding the optimal techniques for aerosol delivery with HFNC. Based on a comprehensive literature search, we reviewed studies that assessed trans-nasal pulmonary aerosol delivery with HFNC by in vitro experiments, and in vivo, by radiolabeled, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies. In these investigations, the type of nebulizer employed and its placement, carrier gas, the relationship between gas flow and patient’s inspiratory flow, aerosol delivery strategies (intermittent unit dose vs continuous administration by infusion pump), and open vs closed mouth breathing influenced aerosol delivery. The objective of this review was to provide rational recommendations for optimizing aerosol delivery with HFNC in various clinical settings.

In vitro comparison of unit dose vs infusion pump administration of albuterol via high-flow nasal cannula in toddlers

OBJECTIVES

Transnasal pulmonary aerosol delivery using high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) devices has become a popular route of aerosol administration in toddlers. Clinically, albuterol is administered using an infusion pump or unit doses. However, little evidence is available to compare the two administration strategies.

METHODS

A toddler manikin (15 kg) with appropriate anatomic airway was connected with collecting filter to a simulator of distressed breathing. HFNC device with mesh nebulizer placed at the inlet of a humidifier at 37°C, with the gas flow set at 25 and 3.75 L/min. Five milligrams of albuterol was delivered in all experiments. With infusion pump administration, albuterol concentrations of 5 and 1 mg/mL were delivered at 4 and 20 mL/hr for 15 minutes. With unit dose administration, 1 mL (5 mg/mL) and 2 mL (2.5 mg/mL) of albuterol were nebulized. Additional tests with mouth open and nebulizers via mask were using 5 mg/1 mL for mesh nebulizer and 5 mg/3 mL for jet nebulizer (n = 3). The drug was eluted from the filter and assayed with UV spectrophotometry (276 nm).

RESULTS

The inhaled dose was higher with unit dose than infusion pump administration with gas flows of 25 L/min (2.66 ± 0.38 vs 1.16 ± 0.28%; P = .004) and 3.75 L/min (10.51 ± 1.29 vs 8.58 ± 0.68%; P = .025). During unit dose administration, compared with closed-mouth breathing, open-mouth breathing generated a higher inhaled dose at 3.75 L/min and lower inhaled dose at 25 L/min. Compared to the nebulizers via mask with both open and closed-mouth breathing, nebulization via HFNC at 3.75 L/min generated greater inhaled dose, while HFNC at 25 L/min generated lower inhaled dose.

CONCLUSIONS

During transnasal aerosol delivery, the inhaled dose was higher with medication administrated using unit dose than using an infusion pump.

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 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.

Investigation of Fugitive Aerosols Released into the Environment during High-Flow Therapy

BACKGROUND

Nebulised medical aerosols are designed to deliver drugs to the lungs to aid in the treatment of respiratory diseases. However, an unintended consequence is the potential for fugitive emissions during patient treatment, which may pose a risk factor in both clinical and homecare settings.

METHODS

The current study examined the potential for fugitive emissions, using albuterol sulphate as a tracer aerosol during high-flow therapy. A nasal cannula was connected to a head model or alternatively, a interface was connected to a tracheostomy tube in combination with a simulated adult and paediatric breathing profile. Two aerodynamic particle sizers (APS) recorded time-series aerosol concentrations and size distributions at two different distances relative to the simulated patient.

RESULTS

The results showed that the quantity and characteristics of the fugitive emissions were influenced by the interface type, patient type and supplemental gas-flow rate. There was a trend in the adult scenarios; as the flow rate increased, the fugitive emissions and the mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) of the aerosol both decreased. The fugitive emissions were comparable when using the adult breathing profiles for the nasal cannula and tracheostomy interfaces; however, there was a noticeable distinction between the two interfaces when compared for the paediatric breathing profiles. The highest recorded aerosol concentration was 0.370 ± 0.046 mg m-3 from the tracheostomy interface during simulated paediatric breathing with a gas-flow rate of 20 L/min. The averaged MMAD across all combinations ranged from 1.248 to 1.793 µm by the APS at a distance of 0.8 m away from the patient interface.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the results highlight the potential for secondary inhalation of fugitive emissions released during simulated aerosol treatment with concurrent high-flow therapy. The findings will help in developing policy and best practice for risk mitigation from fugitive emissions.