Delivery of a nebulized aerosol to a lung model during mechanical ventilation. Effect of ventilator settings and nebulizer type, position, and volume of fill

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.

Inhaled drug delivery: a randomized study in intubated patients with healthy lungs

BACKGROUND

The administration technique for inhaled drug delivery during invasive ventilation remains debated. This study aimed to compare in vivo and in vitro the deposition of a radiolabeled aerosol generated through four configurations during invasive ventilation, including setups optimizing drug delivery.

METHODS

Thirty-one intubated postoperative neurosurgery patients with healthy lungs were randomly assigned to four configurations of aerosol delivery using a vibrating-mesh nebulizer and specific ventilator settings: (1) a specific circuit for aerosol therapy (SCAT) with the nebulizer placed at 30 cm of the wye, (2) a heated-humidified circuit switched off 30 min before the nebulization or (3) left on with the nebulizer at the inlet of the heated-humidifier, (4) a conventional circuit with the nebulizer placed between the heat and moisture exchanger filter and the endotracheal tube. Aerosol deposition was analyzed using planar scintigraphy.

RESULTS

A two to three times greater lung delivery was measured in the SCAT group, reaching 19.7% (14.0-24.5) of the nominal dose in comparison to the three other groups (p < 0.01). Around 50 to 60% of lung doses reached the outer region of both lungs in all groups. Drug doses in inner and outer lung regions were significantly increased in the SCAT group (p < 0.01), except for the outer right lung region in the fourth group due to preferential drug trickling from the endotracheal tube and the trachea to the right bronchi. Similar lung delivery was observed whether the heated humidifier was switched off or left on. Inhaled doses measured in vitro correlated with lung doses (R = 0.768, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Optimizing the administration technique enables a significant increase in inhaled drug delivery to the lungs, including peripheral airways. Before adapting mechanical ventilation, studies are required to continue this optimization and to assess its impact on drug delivery and patient outcome in comparison to more usual settings.

Aerosol therapy in adult critically ill patients: a consensus statement regarding aerosol administration strategies during various modes of respiratory support

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice of aerosol delivery in conjunction with respiratory support devices for critically ill adult patients remains a topic of controversy due to the complexity of the clinical scenarios and limited clinical evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To reach a consensus for guiding the clinical practice of aerosol delivery in patients receiving respiratory support (invasive and noninvasive) and identifying areas for future research.

METHODS

A modified Delphi method was adopted to achieve a consensus on technical aspects of aerosol delivery for adult critically ill patients receiving various forms of respiratory support, including mechanical ventilation, noninvasive ventilation, and high-flow nasal cannula. A thorough search and review of the literature were conducted, and 17 international participants with considerable research involvement and publications on aerosol therapy, comprised a multi-professional panel that evaluated the evidence, reviewed, revised, and voted on recommendations to establish this consensus.

RESULTS

We present a comprehensive document with 20 statements, reviewing the evidence, efficacy, and safety of delivering inhaled agents to adults needing respiratory support, and providing guidance for healthcare workers. Most recommendations were based on in-vitro or experimental studies (low-level evidence), emphasizing the need for randomized clinical trials. The panel reached a consensus after 3 rounds anonymous questionnaires and 2 online meetings.

CONCLUSIONS

We offer a multinational expert consensus that provides guidance on the optimal aerosol delivery techniques for patients receiving respiratory support in various real-world clinical scenarios.

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.

New modes of surfactant delivery

The provision of exogenous surfactant to premature infants with respiratory distress syndrome has revolutionized the way we care for these patients, significantly improving survival and decreasing morbidity. Currently, the Intubate-SURfactant-Extubate (INSURE) to non-invasive ventilation method remains the standard method for surfactant delivery in the United States. However, the INSURE method requires intubation via direct visualization with a laryngoscope and possible need for sedation. Both carry significant risk to the patients, prompting the development of less invasive ways of safely and efficaciously providing surfactant to newborn infants. The present article reviews and describes the benefits and limitations of several of these alternative methods, including Less Invasive Surfactant Administration (LISA), Minimally Invasive Surfactant Therapy (MIST), via aerosolization, laryngeal mask airway (LMA), and direct nasopharyngeal deposition, focusing on assessment of clinical benefits and the level/risk of invasiveness.

Indian Guidelines on Nebulization Therapy

Inhalational therapy, today, happens to be the mainstay of treatment in obstructive airway diseases (OADs), such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and is also in the present, used in a variety of other pulmonary and even non-pulmonary disorders. Hand-held inhalation devices may often be difficult to use, particularly for children, elderly, debilitated or distressed patients. Nebulization therapy emerges as a good option in these cases besides being useful in the home care, emergency room and critical care settings. With so many advancements taking place in nebulizer technology; availability of a plethora of drug formulations for its use, and the widening scope of this therapy; medical practitioners, respiratory therapists, and other health care personnel face the challenge of choosing appropriate inhalation devices and drug formulations, besides their rational application and use in different clinical situations. Adequate maintenance of nebulizer equipment including their disinfection and storage are the other relevant issues requiring guidance. Injudicious and improper use of nebulizers and their poor maintenance can sometimes lead to serious health hazards, nosocomial infections, transmission of infection, and other adverse outcomes. Thus, it is imperative to have a proper national guideline on nebulization practices to bridge the knowledge gaps amongst various health care personnel involved in this practice. It will also serve as an educational and scientific resource for healthcare professionals, as well as promote future research by identifying neglected and ignored areas in this field. Such comprehensive guidelines on this subject have not been available in the country and the only available proper international guidelines were released in 1997 which have not been updated for a noticeably long period of over two decades, though many changes and advancements have taken place in this technology in the recent past. Much of nebulization practices in the present may not be evidence-based and even some of these, the way they are currently used, may be ineffective or even harmful. Recognizing the knowledge deficit and paucity of guidelines on the usage of nebulizers in various settings such as inpatient, out-patient, emergency room, critical care, and domiciliary use in India in a wide variety of indications to standardize nebulization practices and to address many other related issues; National College of Chest Physicians (India), commissioned a National task force consisting of eminent experts in the field of Pulmonary Medicine from different backgrounds and different parts of the country to review the available evidence from the medical literature on the scientific principles and clinical practices of nebulization therapy and to formulate evidence-based guidelines on it. The guideline is based on all possible literature that could be explored with the best available evidence and incorporating expert opinions. To support the guideline with high-quality evidence, a systematic search of the electronic databases was performed to identify the relevant studies, position papers, consensus reports, and recommendations published. Rating of the level of the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendation was done using the GRADE system. Six topics were identified, each given to one group of experts comprising of advisors, chairpersons, convenor and members, and such six groups (A-F) were formed and the consensus recommendations of each group was included as a section in the guidelines (Sections I to VI). The topics included were: A. Introduction, basic principles and technical aspects of nebulization, types of equipment, their choice, use, and maintenance B. Nebulization therapy in obstructive airway diseases C. Nebulization therapy in the intensive care unit D. Use of various drugs (other than bronchodilators and inhaled corticosteroids) by nebulized route and miscellaneous uses of nebulization therapy E. Domiciliary/Home/Maintenance nebulization therapy; public & health care workers education, and F. Nebulization therapy in COVID-19 pandemic and in patients of other contagious viral respiratory infections (included later considering the crisis created due to COVID-19 pandemic). Various issues in different sections have been discussed in the form of questions, followed by point-wise evidence statements based on the existing knowledge, and recommendations have been formulated.

Protein and peptide delivery to lungs by using advanced targeted drug delivery

The challenges and difficulties associated with conventional drug delivery systems have led to the emergence of novel, advanced targeted drug delivery systems. Therapeutic drug delivery of proteins and peptides to the lungs is complicated owing to the large size and polar characteristics of the latter. Nevertheless, the pulmonary route has attracted great interest today among formulation scientists, as it has evolved into one of the important targeted drug delivery platforms for the delivery of peptides, and related compounds effectively to the lungs, primarily for the management and treatment of chronic lung diseases. In this review, we have discussed and summarized the current scenario and recent developments in targeted delivery of proteins and peptide-based drugs to the lungs. Moreover, we have also highlighted the advantages of pulmonary drug delivery over conventional drug delivery approaches for peptide-based drugs, in terms of efficacy, retention time and other important pharmacokinetic parameters. The review also highlights the future perspectives and the impact of targeted drug delivery on peptide-based drugs in the coming decade.

Aerosol delivery via invasive ventilation: a narrative review

In comparison with spontaneously breathing non-intubated subjects, intubated, mechanically ventilated patients encounter various challenges, barriers, and opportunities in receiving medical aerosols. Since the introduction of mechanical ventilation as a part of modern critical care medicine during the middle of the last century, aerosolized drug delivery by jet nebulizers has become a common practice. However, early evidence suggested that aerosol generators differed in their efficacies, and the introduction of newer aerosol technology (metered dose inhalers, ultrasonic nebulizer, vibrating mesh nebulizers, and soft moist inhaler) into the ventilator circuit opened up the possibility of optimizing inhaled aerosol delivery during mechanical ventilation that could meet or exceed the delivery of the same aerosols in spontaneously breathing patients. This narrative review will catalogue the primary variables associated with this process and provide evidence to guide optimal aerosol delivery and dosing during mechanical ventilation. While gaps exist in relation to the appropriate aerosol drug dose, discrepancies in practice, and cost-effectiveness of the administered aerosol drugs, we also present areas for future research and practice. Clinical practice should expand to incorporate these techniques to improve the consistency of drug delivery and provide safer and more effective care for patients.

Aerosol Therapy for Pneumonia in the Intensive Care Unit

Antibiotic aerosolization in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) allows very high concentrations of antimicrobial agents in the respiratory secretions, far more than those achievable using the intravenous route. However, data in critically ill patients with pneumonia are limited. Administration of aerosolized antibiotics might increase the likelihood of clinical resolution, but no significant improvements in important outcomes have been consistently documented. Thus, aerosolized antibiotics should be restricted to the treatment of extensively resistant gram-negative pneumonia. In these cases, the use of a vibrating-mesh nebulizer seems to be more efficient, but specific settings and conditions are required to improve lung delivery.

Aerosol delivery during invasive mechanical ventilation: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

This systematic review aimed to assess inhaled drug delivery in mechanically ventilated patients or in animal models. Whole lung and regional deposition and the impact of the ventilator circuit, the artificial airways and the administration technique for aerosol delivery were analyzed.

METHODS

In vivo studies assessing lung deposition during invasive mechanical ventilation were selected based on a systematic search among four databases. Two investigators independently assessed the eligibility and the risk of bias.

RESULTS

Twenty-six clinical and ten experimental studies were included. Between 30% and 43% of nominal drug dose was lost to the circuit in ventilated patients. Whole lung deposition of up to 16% and 38% of nominal dose (proportion of drug charged in the device) were reported with nebulizers and metered-dose inhalers, respectively. A penetration index inferior to 1 observed in scintigraphic studies indicated major proximal deposition. However, substantial concentrations of antibiotics were measured in the epithelial lining fluid (887 (406-12,819) μg/mL of amikacin) of infected patients and in sub-pleural specimens (e.g., 197 μg/g of amikacin) dissected from infected piglets, suggesting a significant distal deposition. The administration technique varied among studies and may explain a degree of the variability of deposition that was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung deposition was lower than 20% of nominal dose delivered with nebulizers and mostly occurred in proximal airways. Further studies are needed to link substantial concentrations of antibiotics in infected pulmonary fluids to pulmonary deposition. The administration technique with nebulizers should be improved in ventilated patients in order to ensure an efficient but safe, feasible and reproducible technique.

Nebulized antibiotics in mechanically ventilated patients: a challenge for translational research from technology to clinical care

Nebulized antibiotic therapy directly targets airways and lung parenchyma resulting in high local concentrations and potentially lower systemic toxicities. Experimental and clinical studies have provided evidence for elevated lung concentrations and rapid bacterial killing following the administration of nebulized antibiotics during mechanical ventilation. Delivery of high concentrations of antibiotics to infected lung regions is the key to achieving efficient nebulized antibiotic therapy. However, current non-standardized clinical practice, the difficulties with implementing optimal nebulization techniques and the lack of robust clinical data have limited its widespread adoption. The present review summarizes the techniques and clinical constraints for optimal delivery of nebulized antibiotics to lung parenchyma during invasive mechanical ventilation. Pulmonary pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of nebulized antibiotic therapy to treat ventilator-associated pneumonia are discussed and put into perspective. Experimental and clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics support the use of nebulized antibiotics. However, its clinical benefits compared to intravenous therapy remain to be proved. Future investigations should focus on continuous improvement of nebulization practices and techniques. Before expanding its clinical use, careful design of large phase III randomized trials implementing adequate therapeutic strategies in targeted populations is required to demonstrate the clinical effectiveness of nebulized antibiotics in terms of patient outcomes and reduction in the emergence of antibiotic resistance.

Inhaled Antibiotics for Gram-Negative Respiratory Infections

Gram-negative organisms comprise a large portion of the pathogens responsible for lower respiratory tract infections, especially those that are nosocomially acquired, and the rate of antibiotic resistance among these organisms continues to rise. Systemically administered antibiotics used to treat these infections often have poor penetration into the lung parenchyma and narrow therapeutic windows between efficacy and toxicity. The use of inhaled antibiotics allows for maximization of target site concentrations and optimization of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic indices while minimizing systemic exposure and toxicity. This review is a comprehensive discussion of formulation and drug delivery aspects, in vitro and microbiological considerations, pharmacokinetics, and clinical outcomes with inhaled antibiotics as they apply to disease states other than cystic fibrosis. In reviewing the literature surrounding the use of inhaled antibiotics, we also highlight the complexities related to this route of administration and the shortcomings in the available evidence. The lack of novel anti-Gram-negative antibiotics in the developmental pipeline will encourage the innovative use of our existing agents, and the inhaled route is one that deserves to be further studied and adopted in the clinical arena.

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.

Nebulizers for drug delivery to the lungs

INTRODUCTION

Nebulizers are the oldest modern method of delivering aerosols to the lungs for the purpose of respiratory drug delivery. While use of nebulizers remains widespread in the hospital and home setting, certain newer nebulization technologies have enabled more portable use. Varied fundamental processes of droplet formation and breakup are used in modern nebulizers, and these processes impact device performance and suitability for nebulization of various formulations.

AREAS COVERED

This review first describes basic aspects of nebulization technologies, including jet nebulizers, various high-frequency vibration techniques, and the use of colliding liquid jets. Nebulizer use in hospital and home settings is discussed next. Complications in aerosol droplet size measurement owing to the changes in nebulized droplet diameters due to evaporation or condensation are discussed, as is nebulization during mechanical ventilation.

EXPERT OPINION

While the limelight may often appear to be focused on other delivery devices, such as pressurized metered dose and dry powder inhalers, the ease of formulating many drugs in water and delivering them as aqueous aerosols ensures that nebulizers will remain as a viable and relevant method of respiratory drug delivery. This is particularly true given recent improvements in nebulizer droplet production technology.

Influence of inspiratory flow pattern and nebulizer position on aerosol delivery with a vibrating-mesh nebulizer during invasive mechanical ventilation: an in vitro analysis

BACKGROUND

Aerosol delivery during invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) depends on nebulizer type, placement of the nebulizer and ventilator settings. The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of two inspiratory flow patterns on amikacin delivery with a vibrating-mesh nebulizer placed at different positions on an adult lung model of IMV equipped with a proximal flow sensor (PFS).

METHODS

IMV was simulated using a ventilator connected to a lung model through an 8-mm inner-diameter endotracheal tube. The impact of a decelerating and a constant flow pattern on aerosol delivery was evaluated in volume-controlled mode (tidal volume 500 mL, 20 breaths/min, inspiratory time of 1 sec, bias flow of 10 L/min). An amikacin solution (250 mg/3 mL) was nebulized with Aeroneb Solo(®) placed at five positions on the ventilator circuit equipped with a PFS: connected to the endotracheal tube (A), to the Y-piece (B), placed at 15 cm (C) and 45 cm upstream of the Y-piece (D), and placed at 15 cm of the inspiratory outlet of the ventilator (E). The four last positions were also tested without PFS. Deposited doses of amikacin were measured using the gravimetric residual method.

RESULTS

Amikacin delivery was significantly reduced with a decelerating inspiratory flow pattern compared to a constant flow (p<0.05). With a constant inspiratory flow pattern, connecting the nebulizer to the endotracheal tube enabled similar deposited doses than these obtained when connecting the nebulizer close to the ventilator. The PFS reduced deposited doses only when the nebulizer was connected to the Y-piece with both flow patterns or placed at 15 cm of the Y-piece with a constant inspiratory flow (p<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Using similar tidal volume and inspiratory time, a constant flow pattern (30 L/min) delivers a higher amount of amikacin through an endotracheal tube compared to a decelerating inspiratory flow pattern (peak inspiratory flow around 60 L/min). The optimal nebulizer position depends on the inspiratory flow pattern and the presence of a PFS.

Role of inhaled antibacterials in hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia

Inhaled antibiotics are not usually considered outside the setting of cystic fibrosis or Pneumocystis jiroveci prophylaxis. However, because they deliver high drug concentrations at the site of infection with negligible systemic absorption and toxicity, they are logical compliments to standard intravenous therapy for severe nosocomial pneumonias -- particularly those caused by multiresistant organisms. Older studies that have shown marginal or no benefit have either applied inhaled antibiotics indiscriminately to low risk populations, or have used crude delivery systems, such as hand atomizers or poured it into the endotracheal tube. Although inhaled antibiotics cannot be recommended for prevention of nosocomial pneumonia at this time, a few studies involving prophylaxis have shown promising trends, particularly in high-risk patients with predisposing conditions. The greatest potential of inhaled antibiotics lies in the treatment of severe healthcare-associated pneumonia caused by a multiresistant organism. The method of delivery is extremely important. Trials that have shown the most benefit, even against pathogens most difficult to eradicate and in damaged lungs, have used optimized delivery systems. Most authorities recommend using ultrasonic or vibrating disk nebulizers to generate particle sizes between 1 and 5 microm that are crucial for deposition in terminal bronchioles and alveoli. Inhaled liposomal amphotericin has also demonstrated encouraging results in animal trials. Recently, inhaled phytochemicals were successfully employed in the treatment of a patient with primary pulmonary tuberculosis. When used selectively in high-risk patients, or in the treatment of established pneumonia, inhaled antibiotics have not been associated with development of resistant organisms.

Delivering antibiotics to the lungs of patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia: an update

Ventilator-associated pneumonia is a serious hospital-acquired infection, with 20-70% crude mortality and 10-40% estimated attributable mortality. Insufficient antibiotic concentrations at the infection site when these drugs are given intravenously may lead to poor outcomes, particularly when difficult-to-treat pathogens are responsible; for example, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, extended spectrum beta lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacilli, Acinetobacter spp. and/or methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Direct drug delivery to the infection site via aerosolization combined with intravenous administration achieves concentrations exceeding MICs of the pathogens, even those with impaired susceptibility. Experimental and recent clinical results demonstrated our markedly improved ability to deliver aerosolized antibiotics to the lung with new-generation devices, for example, vibrating-mesh nebulizers. Convincing clinical data from a large randomized trial are still lacking to support the routine administration of aerosolized antibiotics to treat ventilator-associated pneumonia, even though some small-randomized trials' observations are encouraging.

Inhalation therapy in patients receiving mechanical ventilation: an update

Incremental gains in understanding the influence of various factors on aerosol delivery in concert with technological advancements over the past 2 decades have fueled an ever burgeoning literature on aerosol therapy during mechanical ventilation. In-line use of pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) and nebulizers is influenced by a host of factors, some of which are unique to ventilator-supported patients. This article reviews the impact of various factors on aerosol delivery with pMDIs and nebulizers, and elucidates the correlation between in-vitro estimates and in-vivo measurement of aerosol deposition in the lung. Aerosolized bronchodilator therapy with pMDIs and nebulizers is commonly employed in intensive care units (ICUs), and bronchodilators are among the most frequently used therapies in mechanically ventilated patients. The use of inhaled bronchodilators is not restricted to mechanically ventilated patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma, as they are routinely employed in other ventilator-dependent patients without confirmed airflow obstruction. The efficacy and safety of bronchodilator therapy has generated a great deal of interest in employing other inhaled therapies, such as surfactant, antibiotics, prostacyclins, diuretics, anticoagulants and mucoactive agents, among others, in attempts to improve outcomes in critically ill ICU patients receiving mechanical ventilation.

Aerosol therapy in patients receiving noninvasive positive pressure ventilation

In selected patients, noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) with a facemask is now commonly employed as the first choice for providing mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU). Aerosol therapy for treatment of acute or acute-on-chronic respiratory failure in this setting may be delivered by pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) with a chamber spacer and facemask or nebulizer and facemask. This article reviews the host of factors influencing aerosol delivery with these devices during NIPPV. These factors include (1) the type of ventilator, (2) mode of ventilation, (3) circuit conditions, (4) type of interface, (5) type of aerosol generator, (6) drug-related factors, (7) breathing parameters, and (8) patient-related factors. Despite the impediments to efficient aerosol delivery because of continuous gas flow, high inspiratory flow rates, air leaks, circuit humidity, and patient-ventilator asynchrony, significant therapeutic effects are achieved after inhaled bronchodilator administration to patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Similarly to invasive mechanical ventilation, careful attention to the technique of drug administration is required to optimize therapeutic effects of inhaled therapies during NIPPV. Assessment of the patient's ability to tolerate a facemask, the level of respiratory distress, hemodynamic status, and synchronization of aerosol generation with inspiratory airflow are important factors contributing to the success of aerosol delivery during NIPPV. Further research into novel delivery methods, such as the use of NIPPV with nasal cannulae, could enhance the efficiency, ease of use, and reproducibility of inhalation therapy during noninvasive ventilation.

Inhaled antibiotic therapy for ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis and ventilator-associated pneumonia: an update

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in mechanically-ventilated patients in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis (VAT) was previously believed to be an intermediate stage between colonization of the lower respiratory tract and VAP. More recent data, however, suggest that VAT may be a separate entity that increases morbidity and mortality, independently of the occurrence of VAP. Some, but not all, patients with VAT progress to develop VAP. Although inhaled antibiotics alone could be effective for the treatment of VAP, the current consensus of opinion favors their role as adjuncts to systemic antimicrobial therapy for VAP. Inhaled antibiotics are increasingly employed for salvage therapy in patients with VAP due to multi-drug resistant Gram-negative bacteria. In contrast to VAP, VAT could be effectively treated with inhaled antibiotic therapy alone or in combination with systemic antimicrobials.

Aerosol delivery to ventilated newborn infants: historical challenges and new directions

There are several aerosolized drugs which have been used in the treatment of neonatal respiratory illnesses, such as bronchodilators, diuretics, and surfactants. Preclinical in vitro and in vivo studies identified a number of variables that affect aerosol efficiency, including particle size, aerosol flows, nebulizer choice, and placement. Nevertheless, an optimized aerosol drug delivery system for mechanically ventilated infants still does not exist. Increasing interest in this form of drug delivery requires more controlled and focused research of drug/device combinations appropriate for the neonatal population. In the present article, we review the research that has been conducted thus far and discuss the next steps in developing the optimal aerosol delivery system for use in mechanically ventilated neonates.

Ultrasonic nebulization platforms for pulmonary drug delivery

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

Since the 1950s, ultrasonic nebulizers have played an important role in pulmonary drug delivery. As the process in which aerosol droplets are generated is independent and does not require breath-actuation, ultrasonic nebulizers, in principle, offer the potential for instantaneously fine-tuning the dose administered to the specific requirements of a patient, taking into account the patient's breathing pattern, physiological profile and disease state. Nevertheless, owing to the difficulties and limitations associated with conventional designs and technologies, ultrasonic nebulizers have never been widely adopted, and have in recent years been in a state of decline.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

An overview is provided on the advances in new miniature ultrasonic nebulization platforms in which large increases in lung dose efficiency have been reported.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

In addition to a discussion of the underlying mechanisms governing ultrasonic nebulization, in which there appears to be widely differing views, the advantages and shortcomings of conventional ultrasonic nebulization technology are reviewed and advanced state-of-the-art technologies that have been developed recently are discussed.

TAKE HOME MESSAGE

Recent advances in ultrasonic nebulization technology demonstrate significant potential for the development of smart, portable inhalation therapy platforms for the future. Nevertheless, there remain considerable challenges that need to be addressed before such personalized delivery systems can be realized. These have to be addressed across the spectrum from fundamental physics through to in vivo device testing and dealing with the relevant regulatory framework.

AEROSOL DELIVERY DURING MECHANICAL VENTILATION TO THE RAT

The authors have adjusted a jet nebulizer to a mechanical ventilator (Servo Ventilator, Siemens) to deliver an aerosol to rats. They aimed to clarify whether a modified jet nebulizer generating particles with a mass median aerodynamic diameter of 2 microm would be effective and safe in intubated ventilated rats. Fluorescent microspheres (diameter: 1.0 microm) were aerosolized to verify qualitatively and quantitatively intrapulmonary deposition. Particle deposition fraction was 3.8% (1.3%) of the delivered dose (median [interquartile range]). There was no evidence for any adverse event as assessed from heart rate, mean arterial pressure, PaO2 and PaCO2 before, during, and after nebulization. No pulmonary tissue trauma was detected histologically.

How best to deliver aerosol medications to mechanically ventilated patients

Pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) and nebulizers are employed routinely for aerosol delivery to ventilator-supported patients, but the ventilator circuit and artificial airway previously were thought to be major barriers to effective delivery of aerosols to patients receiving mechanical ventilation. In the past two decades, several investigators have shown that careful attention to many factors, such as the position of the patient, the type of aerosol generator and its configuration in the ventilator circuit, aerosol particle size, artificial airway, conditions in the ventilator circuit, and ventilatory parameters, is necessary to optimize aerosol delivery during mechanical ventilation. The best techniques for aerosol delivery during noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation are not well established as yet, and the efficiency of aerosol delivery in this setting is lower than that during invasive mechanical ventilation. The most efficient methods of using the newer hydrofluoroalkane-pMDIs and vibrating mesh nebulizers in ventilator-supported patients also require further evaluation. When optimal techniques of administration are employed, the efficiency of aerosolized drug delivery in mechanically ventilated patients is comparable to that achieved in ambulatory patients.

Aerosol delivery during mechanical ventilation: from basic techniques to new devices

Pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) and nebulizers are routinely employed for aerosol delivery in mechanically ventilated patients. A significant proportion of the aerosol deposits in the ventilator circuit and artificial airway, thereby reducing the inhaled drug mass. Factors influencing aerosol delivery during mechanical ventilation differ from those in spontaneously breathing patients. The English language literature on aerosol delivery during mechanical ventilation was reviewed. Marked variations in the efficiency of drug delivery with pMDIs and nebulizers occur due to differences in the technique of administration. Careful attention to five factors, viz., the aerosol generator, aerosol particle size, conditions in the ventilator circuit, artificial airway, and ventilator parameters, is necessary to optimize aerosol delivery during mechanical ventilation. Factors influencing drug delivery during NPPV are not well understood, and the efficiency of aerosol delivery in this setting is lower than that during invasive mechanical ventilaiton. With an optimal technique of administration the efficiency of aerosol delivery during mechanical ventilation is similar to that achieved during spontaneous breathing. Further research is needed to optimize aerosol delivery during NPPV.

Inhaled bronchodilator administration during mechanical ventilation: how to optimize it, and for which clinical benefit?

Bronchodilators are frequently used in ICU patients, and are the most common medications administered by inhalation during mechanical ventilation. The amount of bronchodilator that deposits at its site of action depends on the amount of drug, inhaled mass, deposited mass, and particle size distribution. Mechanical ventilation challenges both inhaled mass and lung deposition by specific features, such as a ventilatory circuit, an endotracheal tube, and ventilator settings. Comprehensive in vitro studies have shown that an endotracheal tube is not as significant a barrier for the drug to travel as anticipated. Key variables of drug deposition are attachments of the inhalation device in the inspiratory line 10 to 30 cm to the endotracheal tube, use of chamber with metered-dose inhaler, dry air, high tidal volume, low respiratory frequency, and low inspiratory flow, which can increase the drug deposition. In vivo studies showed that a reduction by roughly 15% of the respiratory resistance was achieved with inhaled bronchodilators during invasive mechanical ventilation. The role of ventilatory settings is not as clear in vivo, and primary factors for optimal delivery and physiologic effects were medication dose and device location. Nebulizers and pressurized metered-dose inhalers can equally achieve physiologic end points. The effects of bronchodilators should be carefully evaluated, which can easily be done with the interrupter technique. With the non-invasive ventilation, the data regarding drug delivery and physiologic effects are still limited. With the bilevel ventilators the inhalation device should be located between the leak port and face mask. Further studies should investigate the effects of inhaled bronchodilators on patient outcome and methods to optimize delivery of inhaled bronchodilators during non-invasive ventilation.

Mechanical ventilation: a tutorial for pharmacists

Mechanical ventilation is an integral part of the critical care environment and requires orchestration by a multidisciplinary team of clinicians to optimize therapeutic outcomes. By tradition, pharmacists have not been included on this team since this therapeutic modality is not considered relevant to their scope of practice. However, pharmacists play a critical role in the management of patients receiving mechanical ventilation by assisting in the development of institutional guidelines and protocols, by maintaining accuracy of prescribed drug dosages, by monitoring for drug-drug and drug-disease interactions, by assisting with alternative drug selections, and by maintaining continued quality assessment of drug administration. Pharmacists able to understand and integrate mechanical ventilation with the pharmacotherapeutic needs of patients are better qualified practitioners. The goal of this article is to help clinical pharmacists better understand the complexities of mechanical ventilation and to apply this information in optimizing delivery of pharmaceutical agents to critical care patients.

Aerosolised Antibacterials for the Prevention and Treatment of Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia

Aerosolised administration of antibacterials remains theoretically attractive for the prevention and treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) because of the ability to generate high drug concentrations at the site of infection. There is renewed interest in this area because of the shortcomings of current therapies and increasing multidrug resistance in Gram-negative organisms. Clinical trials of aerosolised or endotracheally administered antibacterials for HAP prevention have generally been positive; however, early trials were hampered by the development of resistance related to indiscriminate use. More recent trials have shown efficacy at HAP prevention without adverse effects on microflora as a result of more limited usage. However, prophylactic aerosolised antibacterials still need to be studied in large randomised trials before they could enter widespread use. The treatment of HAP with aerosolised antibacterials has mostly been reported in case series without control groups. Both early reports with aminoglycosides and the more recent use of colistin have reported very good response rates; even with organisms such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii. Aerosolised antibacterials were almost always added to intravenous therapy. On the basis of these reports, the current HAP guidelines allow the addition of aerosolised antibacterials in selected patients with multidrug-resistant organisms. This seems to be a reasonable recommendation until large trials are performed. Overall, toxicity was relatively low in the publications reviewed. Aerosolised drug administration in mechanically ventilated patients requires attention to a number of factors in order to maximise drug deposition in the lung.

Factors Influencing the In Vitro Deposition of Tobramycin Aerosol: A Comparison of an Ultrasonic Nebulizer and a High-Frequency Vibrating Mesh Nebulizer

The aim of the study was to elaborate recommendations for inhalation during mechanical ventilation that could optimize delivery. Delivery of aerosols in vitro from nebulizers during mechanical ventilation is dependent on the dimensions of the ventilator circuit, the nebulizer type, and the ventilator settings. A review of the literature shows that some ventilator settings have a larger influence on the amount of aerosol delivered than others. It has been shown in an in vitro model that the factors influencing delivered aerosol are the ventilator flow rate, the diameter of the endotracheal tube, and the time spent in inspiration (all p < 0.05). Two different nebulizer types were used in the study: an ultrasonic nebulizer (SUN 345) and a high-frequency vibrating mesh nebulizer (Aeroneb Pro). No difference in the amount delivered was seen with different nebulizer types (p = 0.215). For optimizing the amount delivered, the largest possible flow, endotracheal tube, and time spent in inspiration should be used.

In vitro evaluation of bronchodilator drug delivery by jet nebulization during pediatric mechanical ventilation

OBJECTIVE

To determine the influence of jet nebulizer brands and nebulization mode on albuterol delivery in a mechanically ventilated pediatric lung model.

DESIGN

In vitro, laboratory study.

SETTING

Research laboratory of a university hospital.

INTERVENTIONS

Using albuterol as a marker, six jet nebulizers (Microneb NA420, Sidestream, Acorn II, Cirrus, Upmist, Micro Mist) were tested in four nebulization modes in a bench model mimicking the ventilatory pattern of a 10-kg infant (Galileo ventilator, Hamilton Medical). The amounts of albuterol deposited on the inspiratory filters at the end of the endotracheal tube were determined, as well as the pressure, flow profiles, and particle size distribution of the jet nebulizers.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Pooling the data of the six jet nebulizer brands (n = 30) indicated that intermittent nebulization during the expiratory phase was more efficient (6.5 +/- 2.5% of the initial dose, p < .001) than intermittent nebulization during the inspiratory phase (1.9 +/- 1.2%) and continuous nebulization with air from the ventilator (4.0 +/- 1.5%) or from an external source (4.2 +/- 1.4%). The particle size distribution at 6 L x min(-1) was between 2.81 and 3.30 microm.

CONCLUSIONS

In our in vitro pediatric lung model, the quantity of inhaled drug was low. Jet nebulizer brands and nebulization modes significantly affected drug delivery, and in vitro models designed for adults cannot be extrapolated to infants.

In vitro study and semiempirical model for aerosol delivery control during mechanical ventilation

The object of this study was to evaluate in vitro the influence of various ventilatory parameters on the delivery of synchronized nebulization of terbutaline during mechanical ventilation and to determine a semiempirical model to control the quantity of aerosol delivered into the patient's lung. An ATOMISOR NL9 M jet nebulizer (La Diffusion Technique Francaise, France) was filled with terbutaline (Bricanyl, Astra-Zeneca, Sweden) and connected to the inspiratory line of a Horus ventilator (Taema, France). Nebulization was synchronized with the inspiratory phase. We assessed at the end of the endotracheal tube the quantity of terbutaline (terbutaline mass output) and the volume median diameter (VMD) by diffraction-laser method. There was a negative correlation between terbutaline mass output and inspiratory air flow ( r =-0.95, p <0.0001) and between VMD and inspiratory air flow ( r =-0.96, p <0.0001). Moreover, positive end-expiratory pressure levels between 0 cm and 8 cm of water did not significantly change the terbutaline output mass ( p =0.22). Total nebulization time and terbutaline mass output calculated by the mathematical model showed good agreement with experimental data. In conclusion, our semiempirical model allows calculation of the duration of the nebulization required to deliver a given mass of terbutaline into patient lungs.

Device Selection and Outcomes of Aerosol Therapy: Evidence-Based Guidelines

BACKGROUND

The proliferation of inhaler devices has resulted in a confusing number of choices for clinicians who are selecting a delivery device for aerosol therapy. There are advantages and disadvantages associated with each device category. Evidence-based guidelines for the selection of the appropriate aerosol delivery device in specific clinical settings are needed.

AIM

(1) To compare the efficacy and adverse effects of treatment using nebulizers vs pressurized metered-dose inhalers (MDIs) with or without a spacer/holding chamber vs dry powder inhalers (DPIs) as delivery systems for beta-agonists, anticholinergic agents, and corticosteroids for several commonly encountered clinical settings and patient populations, and (2) to provide recommendations to clinicians to aid them in selecting a particular aerosol delivery device for their patients.

METHODS

A systematic review of pertinent randomized, controlled clinical trials (RCTs) was undertaken using MEDLINE, EmBase, and the Cochrane Library databases. A broad search strategy was chosen, combining terms related to aerosol devices or drugs with the diseases of interest in various patient groups and clinical settings. Only RCTs in which the same drug was administered with different devices were included. RCTs (394 trials) assessing inhaled corticosteroid, beta2-agonist, and anticholinergic agents delivered by an MDI, an MDI with a spacer/holding chamber, a nebulizer, or a DPI were identified for the years 1982 to 2001. A total of 254 outcomes were tabulated. Of the 131 studies that met the eligibility criteria, only 59 (primarily those that tested beta2-agonists) proved to have useable data.

RESULTS

None of the pooled metaanalyses showed a significant difference between devices in any efficacy outcome in any patient group for each of the clinical settings that was investigated. The adverse effects that were reported were minimal and were related to the increased drug dose that was delivered. Each of the delivery devices provided similar outcomes in patients using the correct technique for inhalation.

CONCLUSIONS

Devices used for the delivery of bronchodilators and steroids can be equally efficacious. When selecting an aerosol delivery device for patients with asthma and COPD, the following should be considered: device/drug availability; clinical setting; patient age and the ability to use the selected device correctly; device use with multiple medications; cost and reimbursement; drug administration time; convenience in both outpatient and inpatient settings; and physician and patient preference.

Aerosol delivery and modern mechanical ventilation: in vitro/in vivo evaluation

Aerosol delivery via a mechanical ventilator remains unregulated with no standards for drug delivery to intubated patients. Bench models predicting drug delivery have not been validated in vivo. For modern ventilator designs, we chose to identify, on the bench, the most important variables affecting aerosol delivery and to correlate in vitro predictions of aerosol delivery with in vivo end points independent of patient response. Test aerosols of albuterol and antibiotics were compared. Bench measurements of inhaled mass (percentage of nebulizer charge, mean +/- SEM) ranged from 5.7 +/- 0.5% to 37.4 +/- 1.6%, with breath-actuated nebulization and humidity identified as the most important factors determining aerosol delivery. In patients, sputum levels of deposited antibiotics varied from 1.10 to 19.6 microg/ml/mg. Variation in sputum levels correlated with predictions from the in vitro model. Aerosol delivery in ventilated patients can be efficient and reproducible only if defined ventilator parameters are tightly controlled. Key parameters can be determined via in vitro bench testing defining delivery standards for clinical trials of drugs with narrow therapeutic/toxicity ratios.

The Effect of Breathing Pattern on Nebulizer Drug Delivery

The significance of using breathing patterns with simplified functional shapes in vented jet nebulizer research is examined. This study is comprised of three parts: (1) The measurement and analysis of human breathing patterns, (2) the subsequent in vitro testing of the effects of breathing pattern differences using a consistent bench test method, and (3) a computer modeling of these effects on the estimated regional drug deposition in the human lung. Breathing through a Pari LC-Star nebulizer caused statistically significant changes (p < or = 0.05) in measured human breathing patterns when compared to normal breathing. Observed changes included an increase in the tidal volume (34%) and period (39%). Additionally, the average duty cycle shifted 12% towards a more symmetrical breath due to the unequal increase in the inhalation and exhalation times (55% and 28%, respectively). The position of the point of maximum flow in each breath phase shifted towards the beginning and end of the breath for the inhale and exhale by 28% and 48%, respectively. The bench testing revealed that breathing pattern shape variation caused statistically significant differences in nebulizer output only in two cases. Decreasing duty cycles and shifting the point of maximum flow towards the beginning of the breath both result in a decrease in output efficiency. Square flow patterns produced slight but consistently higher output efficiencies (average 2.1% higher) and a constant output particle size over the course of each breath, different from the other non-square patterns. Numerical simulations revealed no significant dosage differences resulting from breathing pattern shape variations. However, square wave patterns consistently produced slight overpredictions in comparison with real nebulizer patterns. In contrast, sine wave patterns were found to produce essentially the same results as nebulizer patterns in both the bench tests and in the deposition simulations. This suggests that sine wave shapes are preferable for simulating breathing when bench testing drug delivery using vented jet nebulizers.