Aerosol therapy during mechanical ventilation in intensive care units: A questionnaire-based survey of 2203 ICU medical staff in China

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.

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.