Nasal high-flow bronchodilator nebulization: a randomized cross-over study

High-flow nasal cannula and in-line aerosolised bronchodilator delivery during severe exacerbation of asthma in adults: a feasibility observational study

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a common chronic respiratory disease affecting 1-29% of the population in different countries. Exacerbations represent a change in symptoms and lung function from the patient's usual condition that requires emergency department (ED) admission. Recently, the use of a High-Flow Nasal Cannula (HFNC) plus an in-line vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN) for aerosol drug delivery has been advocated in clinical practice. Thus, this pilot observational study aims to investigate the feasibility of HFNC treatment with VMN for in-line bronchodilator delivery in patients with severe asthma.

METHODS

This study was conducted from May 2022 to May 2023. Subjects ≥18 years old with a previous diagnosis of asthma who were admitted to the ED during severe exacerbation were included. The primary endpoint was the change in peak expiratory flow ratio (PEFR) after 2-h of treatment with bronchodilator delivered by HFNC with in-line VMN. Additional outcomes were changes in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and clinical variables before treatment.

RESULTS

30 patients, mean age of 43 (SD ± 16) years, mostly female (67%) were studied. A significant change in PEFR (147 ± 31 L/m vs. 220 ± 38 L/m; p < 0.001) was observed after treatment with HFNC and in-line VMN with significant improvement in clinical variables. And no subjects required invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) during the study.

CONCLUSIONS

HFNC treatment with in-line VMN for bronchodilator delivery appears feasible and safe for patients with severe asthma exacerbation. These preliminary promising results should be confirmed with appropriately large-designed studies.

Tools used to assess comfort among patients undergoing high flow nasal cannula: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The aims were twofold: (a) to map tools documented in the literature to evaluate comfort among patients undergoing high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) treatment; and (b) to assess if the retrieved tools have been validated for this purpose.

METHODS

A scoping review, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). In July 2023, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and Cochrane Library were consulted. Studies assessing comfort in adult, paediatric, and neonatal patients undergoing HFNC were included.

RESULTS

Seventy-four articles were included, among which nine (12.2 %) investigated comfort as the primary aim. Twenty-five different tools were found, classifiable into 14 types, mostly unidimensional and originating from those measuring pain. The most widely used was the Visual Analogic Scale (n = 27, 35.6 %) followed by the Numerical Rating Scale (n = 11, 14.5 %) and less defined generic tools (n = 10, 13.2 %) with different metrics (e.g. 0-5, 0-10, 0-100). Only the General Comfort Questionnaire and the Comfort Scale were specifically validated for the assessment of comfort among adults and children, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although the comfort of patients undergoing HFNC is widely investigated in the literature, there is a scarcity of tools specifically validated in this field. Those used have been validated mainly to assess pain, suggesting the need to inform patients to prevent confusion while measuring comfort during HFNC and to develop more research in the field.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE

Comfort assessment is an important aspect of nursing care. Given the lack of validation studies in the field, efforts in research are recommended.

Dos and don'ts to optimize transnasal aerosol drug delivery in clinical practice

INTRODUCTION

Transnasal aerosol drug delivery has become widely accepted for treating acutely ill infants, children, and adults. More recently aerosol administration to wider populations receiving high and low-flow nasal oxygen has become common practice.

AREAS COVERED

Skepticism of insufficient aerosol delivery to the lungs has been tempered by multiple in vitro explorations of variables to optimize delivery efficiency. Additionally, clinical studies demonstrated comparable clinical responses to orally inhaled aerosols. This paper provides essential clinical guidance on how to improve transnasal aerosol delivery based on device-, settings-, and drug-related optimization to serve as a resource for educational initiatives and quality enhancement endeavors at healthcare institutions.

EXPERT OPINION

Transnasal aerosol delivery is proliferating worldwide, but indiscriminate use of excessive-high flows, poor selection and placement of aerosol devices and circuits can greatly reduce aerosol delivery and efficacy, potentially compromising treatment to acute and critically ill patients. Attention to these details can improve inhaled dose by an order of magnitude, making the difference between effective treatment and the progression to more invasive ventilatory support, with greater inherent risk and cost. These revelations have prompted specific recommendations for optimal delivery, driving advancements in aerosol generators, formulations, and future device designs to administer aerosols and maximize treatment effectiveness.

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.

Nebuliser therapy in critical care: The past, present and future

Nebulisers are devices that reduce a body of liquid into a fine aerosol suitable for inhalation. Utilising the efficiency of pulmonary drug absorption, they offer a safe and powerful modality for local and systemic drug delivery in the treatment of critical illness. In comparison to conventional jet (JN) and ultrasonic nebulisers (USN), the advent of vibrating mesh nebulisers (VMN) has significantly improved the therapeutic potential of modern devices. This review article aims to summarise the history and evolution of nebulisers from first inception through to the modern vibrating mesh technology. It provides an overview on the basic science of nebulisation and pulmonary drug delivery, and the current use of nebulised therapies in critical care.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

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.

Delivery of Aerosolized Bronchodilators by High-Flow Nasal Cannula During COPD Exacerbation

BACKGROUND

Bronchodilator delivery via a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has generated interest in recent years. The efficacy of in-line vibrating mesh nebulizers with an HFNC during COPD exacerbation is limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical response of subjects with COPD exacerbation who require bronchodilator therapy (anticholinergic and β-agonist) by using a vibrating mesh nebulizer in line with an HFNC.

METHODS

This was a prospective single-center study performed in a respiratory intermediate care unit that enrolled patients with a diagnosis of COPD exacerbation who required noninvasive ventilation on admission. All the subjects underwent noninvasive ventilation breaks with an HFNC. After clinical stability, pulmonary function tests were performed to assess changes in FEV1 and clinical parameters before and after bronchodilation by using a vibrating mesh nebulizer in line with an HFNC.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients with COPD exacerbation were admitted. Five patients who did not use noninvasive ventilation and 10 patients who did not receive bronchodilator treatment with a vibrating mesh nebulizer were excluded. Thirty-one were selected, but 1 subject was secondarily excluded due to loss of data. Finally, 30 subjects were included. The primary outcome was spirometric changes in FEV1. The mean ± SD FEV1 before receiving bronchodilator treatment by using a vibrating mesh nebulizer in line with an HFNC was 0.74 ± 0.10 L, and, after receiving treatment, the mean ± SD FEV1 changed to 0.88 ± 0.12 L (P < .001). Similarly, the mean ± SD FVC increased from 1.75 ± 0.54 L to 2.13 ± 0.63 L (P < .001). Considerable differences were observed in breathing frequency and heart rate after receiving bronchodilator treatment. No relevant changes were observed in the Borg scale or Sp O2 after treatment. The mean clinical stability recorded was 4 d.

CONCLUSIONS

In subjects with COPD exacerbation, bronchodilator treatment by using a vibrating mesh nebulizer in line with an HFNC showed a mild but significant improvement in FEV1 and FVC. In addition, a decrease in breathing frequency was observed, suggesting a reduction in dynamic hyperinflation.

Respiratory Care Management of COPD Exacerbations

A COPD exacerbation is characterized by an increase in symptoms such as dyspnea, cough, and sputum production that worsens over a period of 2 weeks. Exacerbations are common. Respiratory therapists and physicians in an acute care setting often treat these patients. Targeted O2 therapy improves outcomes and should be titrated to an SpO2 of 88-92%. Arterial blood gases remain the standard approach to assessing gas exchange in patients with COPD exacerbation. The limitations of arterial blood gas surrogates (pulse oximetry, capnography, transcutaneous monitoring, peripheral venous blood gases) should be appreciated so that they can be used wisely. Inhaled short-acting bronchodilators can be provided by nebulizer (jet or mesh), pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI), pMDI with spacer or valved holding chamber, soft mist inhaler, or dry powder inhaler. The available evidence for the use of heliox for COPD exacerbation is weak. Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is standard therapy for patients who present with COPD exacerbation and is supported by clinical practice guidelines. Robust high-level evidence with patient important outcomes is lacking for the use of high-flow nasal cannula in patients with COPD exacerbation. Management of auto-PEEP is the priority in mechanically ventilated patients with COPD. This is achieved by reducing airway resistance and decreasing minute ventilation. Trigger asynchrony and cycle asynchrony are addressed to improve patient-ventilator interaction. Patients with COPD should be extubated to NIV. Additional high-level evidence is needed before widespread use of extracorporeal CO2 removal. Care coordination can improve the effectiveness of care for patients with COPD exacerbation. Evidence-based practices improve outcomes in patients with COPD exacerbation.

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

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

Noninvasive Oxygenation in Patients with Acute Respiratory Failure: Current Perspectives

Purpose of Review

High-flow nasal oxygen and noninvasive ventilation are two alternative strategies to standard oxygen in the management of acute respiratory failure.

Discussion

Although high-flow nasal oxygen has gained major popularity in ICUs due to its simplicity of application, good comfort for patients, efficiency in improving oxygenation and promising results in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, further large clinical trials are needed to confirm its superiority over standard oxygen. Non-invasive ventilation may have deleterious effects, especially in patients exerting strong inspiratory efforts, and no current recommendations support its use in this setting. Protective non-invasive ventilation using higher levels of positive-end expiratory pressure, more prolonged sessions and other interfaces such as the helmet may have beneficial physiological effects leading to it being proposed as alternative to high-flow nasal oxygen in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. By contrast, non-invasive ventilation is the first-line strategy of oxygenation in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic lung disease, while high-flow nasal oxygen could be an alternative to non-invasive ventilation after partial reversal of respiratory acidosis. Questions remain about the target populations and non-invasive oxygen strategy representing the best alternative to standard oxygen in acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. As concerns acute on-chronic-respiratory failure, the place of high-flow nasal oxygen remains to be evaluated.

β Agonist Delivery by High-Flow Nasal Cannula During COPD Exacerbation: A Prospective Physiological Study

BACKGROUND

Whereas high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy is increasingly used in patients with exacerbation of COPD, the effectiveness of β ₂ agonist nebulization through HFNC has been poorly assessed. We hypothesized that salbutamol vibrating-mesh nebulization through HFNC improves pulmonary function tests in subjects with COPD.

METHODS

We conducted a physiological crossover study including subjects admitted to the ICU for severe exacerbation of COPD. After subject improvement allowing a 3-h washout period without bronchodilator, pulmonary function tests were performed while breathing through HFNC alone and after salbutamol vibrating-mesh nebulization through HFNC. The primary end point consisted in the changes in FEV₁ before and after salbutamol nebulization. Secondary end points included the changes in FVC, peak expiratory flow (PEF), airway resistance, and clinical parameters.

RESULTS

Among the 15 subjects included, mean (SD) FEV₁ significantly increased after salbutamol nebulization from 931 mL (383) to 1,019 (432), mean difference +87 mL (95% CI 30-145) (P = .006). Similarly, FVC and PEF significantly increased, +174 mL (95% CI 66-282) (P = .004) and +0.3 L/min (95% CI 0-0.6) (P = .037), respectively. Airway resistances and breathing frequency did not significantly differ, whereas heart rate significantly increased after nebulization.

CONCLUSIONS

In subjects with severe exacerbation of COPD, salbutamol vibrating-mesh nebulization through HFNC induced a significant bronchodilator effect with volume and flow improvement.

The Impact of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Device, Nebulizer Type, and Placement on Trans-Nasal Aerosol Drug Delivery: An In Vitro Study

BACKGROUND

Aerosol delivery via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has been increasingly used in recent years. However, the effects of different HFNC devices, nebulizer types, and placement on aerosol deposition remain largely unknown.

METHODS

An adult manikin with anatomically correct upper airway was used with a collection filter placed between the manikin's trachea and a breathing simulator, composed of a dual-chamber model lung driven by a critical care ventilator. Three HFNC device configurations were compared, with vibrating mesh nebulizer and small-volume nebulizer placed at the humidifier (inlet for Optiflow and outlet for Airvo 2) and proximal to the nasal cannula at gas flows of 10, 20, 40 and 60 L/min, in quiet and distressed breathing patterns. Albuterol (2.5 mg) was nebulized for each condition (no. = 3). The drug was eluted from the collection filter and assayed with ultraviolet spectrophotometry (276 nm).

RESULTS

At all settings, except when a nebulizer was placed proximal to the nasal cannula with the Optiflow and when the HFNC flow was set at 60 L/min, the vibrating mesh nebulizer generated a higher inhaled dose than did the small-volume nebulizer (all P < .05). With the exception of distressed breathing at an HFNC flow of 10 L/min, the inhaled dose with the vibrating mesh nebulizer placed at the humidifier was greater than with the vibrating mesh nebulizer placed proximal to the nasal cannula (all P < .05), Optiflow provided a higher inhaled dose than did Airvo 2 with either AirSpiral or 900PT501 circuits with the vibrating mesh nebulizer placed at the humidifier (all P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

During transnasal aerosol delivery, the vibrating mesh nebulizer generated a higher inhaled dose than did the small-volume nebulizer when the nebulizer was placed at the humidifier. With the vibrating mesh nebulizer placed at the humidifier and an HFNC flow > 10 L/min, the inhaled dose was higher than with the vibrating mesh nebulizer placed proximal to the nasal cannula, and the inhaled dose was higher with Optiflow than with Airvo 2.

Bronchodilator Delivery via High-Flow Nasal Cannula: A Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare the Effects of Gas Flows

(1) Background: Aerosol delivery via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has attracted increasing clinical interest. In vitro studies report that the ratio of HFNC gas flow to patient inspiratory flow (GF:IF) is a key factor in the efficiency of trans-nasal aerosol delivery. (2) Methods: In a randomized controlled trial, patients with a history of COPD or asthma and documented positive responses to inhaled bronchodilators in an outpatient pulmonary function laboratory were recruited. Subjects were randomized to receive inhalation at gas flow ratio settings of: GF:IF = 0.5, GF:IF = 1.0, or GF = 50 L/min. Subjects were assigned to inhale saline (control) followed by salbutamol via HFNC with cumulative doses of 0.5 mg, 1.5 mg, 3.5 mg, and 7.5 mg. Spirometry was performed at baseline and 10-12 min after each inhalation. (3) Results: 75 subjects (49 asthma and 26 COPD) demonstrating bronchodilator response were enrolled. Per the robust ATS/ERS criteria no difference was observed between flows, however using the criteria of post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV₁) reaching the screening post-bronchodilator FEV₁ with salbutamol, a higher percentage of subjects receiving GF:IF = 0.5 met the criteria at a cumulative dose of 1.5 mg than those receiving GF:IF = 1.0, and GF = 50 L/min (64% vs. 29% vs. 27%, respectively, p = 0.011). Similarly at 3.5 mg (88% vs. 54% vs. 46%, respectively, p = 0.005). The effective dose at GF:IF = 0.5 was 1.5 mg while for GF = 50 L/min it was 3.5 mg. (4) Conclusions: During salbutamol delivery via HFNC, cumulative doses of 1.5 mg to 3.5 mg resulted in effective bronchodilation. Applying the robust ATS/ERS criteria no difference was observed between the flows, however using the more sensitive criteria of subjects reaching post screening FEV₁ to salbutamol via HFNC, a higher number of subjects responded to the doses of 0.5 mg and 1.5 mg when HFNC gas flow was set at 50% of patient peak inspiratory flow.

Worldwide Clinical Practice of High-Flow Nasal Cannula and Concomitant Aerosol Therapy in the Adult ICU Setting

BACKGROUND

High-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen therapy has been broadly used. However, no consensus has been achieved on the practical implementation of HFNC and how to provide aerosol delivery during HFNC therapy in adult patients.

METHODS

An online anonymous questionnaire survey endorsed by 4 academic societies from America, Europe, mainland China, and Taiwan was administered from May to December 2019. Clinicians who had worked in adult ICUs for > 1 year and had used HFNC to treat patients within 30 days were included.

RESULTS

A total of 2,279 participants clicked on the survey link, 1,358 respondents completed the HFNC section of the questionnaire, whereas 1,014 completed the whole survey. Postextubation hypoxemia and moderate hypoxemia were major indications for HFNC. The initial flow was mainly set at 40-50 L/min. Aerosol delivery via HFNC was used by 24% of the participants (248/1,014), 30% (74/248) of whom reported reducing flow during aerosol delivery. For the patients who required aerosol treatment during HFNC therapy, 40% of the participants (403/1,014) reported placing a nebulizer with a mask or mouthpiece while pursuing HFNC whereas 33% (331/1,014) discontinued HFNC to use conventional aerosol devices. A vibrating mesh nebulizer was the most commonly used nebulizer (40%) and was mainly placed at the inlet of the humidifier.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical utilization of HFNC was variable, as were indications, flow settings, and criteria for adjustment. Many practices associated with concomitant aerosol therapy were not consistent with available evidence for optimal use. More efforts are warranted to close the knowledge gap.

Narrative review of practical aspects of aerosol delivery via high-flow nasal cannula

Using high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) as a "vehicle" to administer aerosolized medication has attracted clinicians' interest in recent years. In this paper, we summarize the current evidence to answer the common questions raised by clinicians about this new aerosol delivery route and best practices of administration. Benefits of trans-nasal aerosol delivery include increased comfort, ability to speak, eat, and drink for patients while meeting a range of oxygen requirements, particularly for those who need to inhale aerosolized medication for long periods. Aerosol administration via HFNC has been shown to be well tolerated by children and adults, with comparable or better delivery efficacy than other interfaces, ranging from 2-20%. In vitro and in vivo scintigraphy studies among pediatric and adult populations reported that the inhaled dose delivered via a vibrating mesh nebulizer is 2 to 3 fold greater than that via a jet nebulizer. For adults, placement of nebulizer at the inlet of humidifier increases inhaled dose while reducing rainout obstructing nasal prongs. When HFNC gas flow is set below patient inspiratory flow, aerosol deposition is higher than when the gas flow exceeds patient inspiratory flow; thus, if tolerated, titrating down HFNC gas flow during trans-nasal aerosol delivery, with close monitoring and the use of unit dose with high concentration are recommended. Trans-nasal pulmonary aerosol delivery has not been shown to increase bioaerosols generated by patients, but gas flow may disperse aerosols. Placement of a surgical or procedure mask over HFNC might reduce aerosol dispersion.

A path to successful patient outcomes through aerosol drug delivery to children: a narrative review

Although using aerosolized medications is a mainstay of treatment in children with asthma and other respiratory diseases, there are many issues in terms of device and interface selection, delivery technique and dosing, as well as patient and parental education that have not changed for half a century. Also, due to many aerosol devices and interfaces available on the market and the broad range of patient characteristics and requirements, providing effective aerosol therapy to children becomes a challenge. While aerosol delivery devices are equally effective, if they are age-appropriate and used correctly, the majority of aerosol devices require multiple steps to be used efficiently. Unfortunately, many children with pulmonary diseases have problems with the correct delivery technique and do not gain therapeutic benefits from therapy that result in poor disease management and increased healthcare costs. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to review the current knowledge on aerosol delivery devices used in children and guide clinicians on the optimum device- and interface-selection, delivery technique, and dosing in this patient population. Strategies on how to deliver aerosolized medications in crying and distressed children and how to educate parents on aerosol therapy and promote patient adherence to prescribed medications are also provided. Future directions of aerosol therapy in children should focus on these issues and implement policies and clinical practices that highlight the potential solutions to these problems.

Pressurized Metered Dose Inhaler Aerosol Delivery Within Nasal High-Flow Circuits: A Bench Study

Background: Obstructive patients may benefit from nasal high-flow (NHF) therapy, but the use of pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs) has not been evaluated in this situation. Methods: Using an adult circuit and medium-sized cannula, we have tested different NHF rates, pMDI positions, breathing patterns, spacers, and spacer orientation. First, we evaluated albuterol delivery at the nasal cannula outlet. The second set of experiments made use of a nasopharyngeal cast to estimate the mass of albuterol potentially reaching the lungs. Albuterol was caught on filters placed at the cannula outlet and downstream of the nasal cast, and albuterol was quantified by spectrophotometry. Results: The highest amounts of albuterol delivered at the cannula outlet were observed with a 30 L/min flow rate (vs. 45 and 60 L/min) and placing the device close to the nasal cannula (in comparison with a position on the dry side of the humidification chamber). The use of a spacer was associated with higher delivery. The highest albuterol delivery was observed placing the spacer close to the nasal cannula, oriented for aerosol delivery following the gas flow and a 30 L/min NHF rate. Using this optimal setting, activating the pMDI at the beginning of inspiration (compared to expiration) increased albuterol delivery downstream of the nasopharyngeal cast. Whether in a quiet- or distress-breathing pattern, our measurements showed an amount of albuterol potentially delivered to the lungs exceeding 10% of the actuated dose in optimal conditions. Conclusions: The use of pMDIs is feasible to deliver albuterol within a NHF circuit. Using a spacer placed just upstream from the nasal cannulas, a low NHF rate and activating the pMDI at the beginning of inspiration was associated with drug delivery susceptible to induce bronchodilation, which will require to be tested in the clinical setting.

[Good practice for aerosol therapy by nebulization in 2020]

Nebulization is a drug delivery mode whose prescription and application remain uncertain. A guide to good practice has been proposed by the work group on aerosol therapy of the French Society for Respiratory Diseases, so-called GAT. The previous recommendations date from 2007. In addition to an update of data on nebulization, these expert recommendations aim to be of real help to the prescriber.

Nasal high-flow oxygen versus noninvasive ventilation in acute exacerbation of COPD: protocol for a randomised noninferiority clinical trial

Background

Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is considered as the first-line treatment for acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) complicated by respiratory acidosis. Recent studies demonstrate a role of nasal high-flow oxygen (NHF) in AECOPD as an alternative treatment in patients intolerant to NIV or with contraindications to it.

Aim

The study aimed to evaluate whether NHF respiratory support is noninferior compared to NIV in respect to treatment failure, defined as need for intubation or change to alternative treatment group, in patients with AECOPD and mild-to-moderate acute or acute-on-chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure.

Methods

We designed a multicentre, prospective, randomised trial on patients with AECOPD, who have pH<7.35 but >7.25 and P_aCO2 >45 mmHg, in whom NIV is indicated as a first-line treatment. According to power analysis, 498 participants will be required for establishing noninferiority of NHF compared to NIV. Patients will be randomly assigned to receive NIV or NHF. Treatment will be adjusted to maintain S_pO2 between 88%–92% for both groups. Arterial blood gases, respiratory variables, comfort, dyspnoea score and any pulmonary or extrapulmonary complications will be assessed at baseline, before treatment initiation, and at 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 48 h, then once daily from day 3 to patient discharge, intubation or death.

Conclusion

Given the increasing number of studies demonstrating the physiological effects of NHF in COPD patients, we hypothesise that NHF respiratory support will be noninferior to NIV in patients with AECOPD and mild-to-moderate acute or acute on chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure.

Nasal high-flow oxygen could be an effective alternative to NIV respiratory support for patients with mild-to-moderate #AECOPD, especially for those who do not tolerate or have contraindications for NIVhttps://bit.ly/3bgxDYx

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.

Acute respiratory failure: nonintubation assist methods for the acutely deteriorating patient

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Noninvasive ventilation is strongly recommended in acute hypercapnic respiratory failure, whereas high-flow nasal oxygen therapy could be an alternative in de novo respiratory failure.

RECENT FINDINGS

High-flow nasal oxygen may improve the outcome of patients de novo respiratory failure as compared with standard oxygen. Its success within 2 h after initiation is well predicted by a ROX index (ratio of SpO2/FiO2 to respiratory rate) greater than 4.88, as failure when less than 3.85 at 12 h after initiation. However, the superiority of high-flow nasal oxygen to standard oxygen has not been confirmed in immunocompromised patients. Although noninvasive ventilation may be deleterious through barotrauma in patients with de novo respiratory failure, its use seems to be an optimal strategy for preoxygenation before intubation in preventing severe hypoxemia in most hypoxemic patients. In mild hypoxemic patient, high-flow nasal oxygen may be more efficient than bag-valve mask in preventing severe adverse events. After anesthetic induction further positive-pressure ventilation can better secure intubation procedure than absence of ventilation.

SUMMARY

Despite the growing use of high-flow nasal oxygen, new studies are needed to confirm its superiority to standard oxygen in de novo respiratory failure and others causes of acute respiratory failure in place of standard oxygen.

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.

Nasal High Flow Use in COPD Patients with Hypercapnic Respiratory Failure: Treatment Algorithm & Review of the Literature

Nasal high flow (NHF) therapy has recently gained attention as a new respiratory support system and is increasingly being utilized in every day clinical practice. Recent studies suggest that it may also be effective in patients with hypercapnia and suggest NHF as a possible alternative for patients who cannot tolerate standard noninvasive ventilation. The present review discusses the mechanisms of action that make NHF potentially suitable for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients and evaluates the current evidence of NHF use for treatment of stable hypercapnic COPD patients as well as acute hypercapnic exacerbation of COPD. An algorithm is also proposed for the clinical application of NHF in patients with acute hypercapnic exacerbation of COPD, based on current literature.

In vitro evaluation of aerosol drug delivery with and without high flow nasal cannula in children

OBJECTIVE

To quantify aerosol delivery with or without a high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) in place using pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) and jet nebulizer (JN) with facemask in a simulated spontaneously breathing pediatric lung model.

METHODS

An upper airway model of a 9-month-old infant (Sophia Anatomical Infant Nose-Throat) with an absolute filter distal to the trachea was connected to a breathing simulator to simulate pediatric parameters (tidal volume = 100 mL, respiratory rate = 30 breaths/min, and I:E ratio = 1:1.4). Oxygen at 3 L/min was administered through an infant HFNC (Fisher & Paykel Healthcare Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand) attached to the nares of the model. Albuterol sulfate (2.5 mg/3 mL) was delivered with JN attached to an aerosol facemask and powered by air at 8 L/min. Ventolin Hydrofluoroalkane (HFA) (360 μg) was administered using pMDI connected to a valved holding chamber (VHC) with a facemask. Aerosol was administered to the model with and without HFNC in the nares (n = 3). Drug was eluted from the filter and quantified using spectrophotometry. Independent t tests were performed for data analysis (P < .05).

RESULTS

Aerosol deposition was greater without HFNC (6.05% ± 1.53% and 39.54% ± 8.98% for JN and pMDI/VHC, respectively) than with HFNC using JN (2.91% ± 0.23%; P = .024) and pMDI/VHC (6.04% ± 0.28%; P = .003). Delivery efficiency of pMDI/VHC was greater than JN with or without nasal cannula in place (P = .0001 and .003, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Aerosol administered via facemask over HFNC was less efficient than removing HFNC during administration. When delivering medical aerosol by facemask, the benefit of increased aerosol delivery must be weighed against the changes in oxygen delivery and risk of lung derecruitment when nasal prongs are removed.

Effect of nebulizer type, delivery interface, and flow rate on aerosol drug delivery to spontaneously breathing pediatric and infant lung models

BACKGROUND

Different types of nebulizers, interfaces, and flow rates are used to deliver aerosolized medications to children. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of nebulizer type, delivery interface, and flow rate on aerosol drug delivery to spontaneously breathing pediatric and infant lung models.

METHODOLOGY

A teaching mannequin was attached to a sinusoidal pump via a collecting filter at the bronchi to simulate a spontaneously breathing child (Vt: 250 mL, RR: 20 bpm and Ti: 1 second) and infant (Vt = 100 mL, RR = 30 bpm, Ti: 0.7 seconds). Albuterol sulfate was nebulized with jet (Misty Max 10; Cardinal Health) and mesh (Aerogen Solo; Aerogen) nebulizers using a low-flow nasal cannula (LFNC; Hudson), a high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC; Fisher & Paykel), face mask (FM; Hudson), and mouthpiece (MP; Cardinal Health). While all interfaces were used in the pediatric study, only LFNC, HFNC, and FM were tested in the infant study. The mesh nebulizer was tested at 2, 4, and 6 L/min with LFNC, 4 and 6 L/min with HFNC, and 6 L/min with FM and MP. The jet nebulizer was operated at 6 and 8 L/min with FM and 6 L/min with LFNC, HFNC, and MP (n = 5). The drug was eluted from the filter and analyzed by spectrophotometry. Factorial analysis of variance and post hoc comparisons were used for data analysis. P < .05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Delivery efficiency of mesh nebulizers is two to fourfold more than jet nebulizers used with HFNC, FM, and MP. No statistical difference was found between jet and mesh nebulizers used with LFNC in infants (P = .643) and pediatrics (P = .255). Aerosol delivery with MP was the best compared to other interfaces used in pediatrics (P < .05). As the second-best interface in aerosol drug delivery, the delivery efficiency of FM was greater than HFNC (P = .0001) and LFNC (P = .0001). Increasing flow rate with LFNC and HFNC decreased aerosol delivery with the mesh nebulizer in both infants and pediatrics.

CONCLUSION

The type of nebulizer, delivery interface, and flow rate used in the treatment of children affect aerosol drug delivery.

The Problematic 2014 American Academy of Pediatrics Bronchiolitis Guidelines

The 2014 American Academy of Pediatrics bronchiolitis guidelines do not adequately serve the needs and clinical realities of front-line clinicians caring for undifferentiated wheezing infants and children. This article describes the clinical challenges of evaluating and managing a heterogeneous disease syndrome presenting as undifferentiated patients to the emergency department. Although the 2014 American Academy of Pediatrics bronchiolitis guidelines and the multiple international guidelines that they closely mirror have made a good faith attempt to provide clinicians with the best evidence-based recommendations possible, they have all failed to address practical, front-line clinical challenges. The therapeutic nihilism of the guidelines and the dissonance between many of the recommendations and frontline realities have had wide-ranging consequences. Nevertheless, newer evidence of therapeutic options is emerging and forecasts hope for more therapeutically optimistic recommendations with the next revision of the guidelines.

Dose Response to Transnasal Pulmonary Administration of Bronchodilator Aerosols via Nasal High-Flow Therapy in Adults with Stable Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Asthma

BACKGROUND

There has been increasing interest in transnasal pulmonary aerosol administration, but the dose-response relationship has not been reported.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the accumulative bronchodilator dose at which patients with stable mild-to-moderate asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) achieve similar spirometry responses before and after bronchodilator tests using albuterol via a metered dose inhaler with a valved holding chamber (MDI + VHC).

METHOD

Adult patients who met ATS/ERS criteria for bronchodilator responses in pulmonary function laboratory were recruited and consented to participate. After a washout period, patients received escalating doubling dosages (0.5, 1, 2, and 4 mg) of albuterol in a total volume of 2 mL delivered by vibrating mesh nebulizer via a nasal cannula at 37°C with a flow rate of 15-20 L/min using a Venturi air entrainment device. Spirometry was measured at baseline and after each dose. Titration was stopped when an additional forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) improvement was <5%.

RESULTS

42 patients (16 males) with stable mild-to-moderate asthma (n = 29) and COPD (n = 13) were enrolled. FEV1 increment after a cumulative dose of 1.5 mg of albuterol via nasal cannula at 15-20 L/min was similar to 4 actuations of MDI + VHC (0.34 ± 0.18 vs. 0.34 ± 0.12 L, p = 0.878). Using ATS/ERS criteria of the bronchodilator test, 33.3% (14/42) and 69% (29/42) of patients responded to 0.5 and 1.5 mg of albuterol, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

With a nasal cannula at 15-20 L/min, transnasal pulmonary delivery of 1.5 mg albuterol resulted in similar bronchodilator response as 4 actuations of MDI + VHC.

Impact of Gas Flow and Humidity on Trans-Nasal Aerosol Deposition via Nasal Cannula in Adults: A Randomized Cross-Over Study

Background: Trans-nasal pulmonary aerosol delivery using high flow nasal cannula (HFNC) devices is described with the administration of high gas flows exceeding patient inspiratory flow (HF) and with lower flows (LF). The aim of this pilot clinical trial was to compare deposition and distribution of radiolabeled aerosol via nasal cannula in healthy adults across three rates of gas flow delivered with active heated humidification, and to further identify the impact of aerosol administration without heated humidity. Methods: Twenty-three (23) healthy adults (16F) were randomized to receive aerosol with active heated humidification or unheated oxygen at gas flows of 10 L/min (n = 8), 30 L/min (n = 7), or 50 L/min (n = 8). Diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid labeled with 1 millicurie (37 MBq) of Technetium-99m (DTPA-Tc99m) was mixed with NaCl to a fill volume of 1 mL, and administered via mesh nebulizer placed at the inlet of the humidifier. Radioactivity counts were performed using a gamma camera and the regions of interest (ROIs) were delimited with counts from the lungs, upper airways, stomach, nebulizer, circuit, and expiratory filter. A mass balance was calculated and each compartment was expressed as a percentage of the total. Results: Lung deposition (mean ± SD) with heated humidified gas was greater at 10 L/min than 30 L/min or 50 L/min (17.2 ± 6.8%, 5.71 ± 2.04%, and 3.46 ± 1.24%, respectively; p = 0.0001). Using unheated carrier gas, a lung dose of aerosol was similar to the active heated humidification condition at 10 L/min, but greater at 30 and 50 L/min (p = 0.011). Administered gas flow and lung deposition were negatively correlated (r = −0.880, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Both flow and active heated humidity inversely impact aerosol delivery through HFNC. Nevertheless, aerosol administration across the range of commonly used flows can provide measurable levels of lung deposition in healthy adult subjects (NCT 02519465).

Effects of flow rate on transnasal pulmonary aerosol delivery of bronchodilators via high-flow nasal cannula for patients with COPD and asthma: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Both in vitro and in vivo radiolabelled studies on nebulisation via high-flow nasal cannula showed that inhaled dose decreases as the administered gas flow increases. In our previous in vitro study, we investigated the effects of the ratio of gas flow to subject's peak inspiratory flow (GF:IF) on the aerosol deposition, which increased as the GF:IF decreased, with an optimal GF:IF between 0.1 and 0.5 producing a stable 'lung' deposition in both quiet and distressed breathing. Thus, we aim to validate our in vitro findings in subjects with reversible airflow limitations by assessing their response to inhaled bronchodilator.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a single-centre, randomised controlled trial. Subjects with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or asthma with positive response to 400μg albuterol via metered dose inhaler and valved holding chamber will be enrolled and consented. After a washout period (1-3 days), subjects will be randomly assigned to inhale albuterol with one of three gas flows: 50 L/min, GF:IF=1.0 and GF:IF=0.5. In each arm, subjects will inhale 2 mL saline, followed by escalating doubling doses (0.5, 1, 2 and 4 mg) of albuterol in a fill volume of 2 mL, delivered by a vibrating mesh nebuliser via heated nasal cannula set up at 37°C. An interval of 30 min between each dose of albuterol, with spirometry measured at baseline and after each inhalation. Titration will be terminated if forced expiratory volume in 1 s improvement is <5%, or adverse event is observed.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial has been approved by the Ethic Committee of People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing, China (no. S2018-200-01). The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, national and international conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03739359; Pre-results.

Epoprostenol Delivered via High Flow Nasal Cannula for ICU Subjects with Severe Hypoxemia Comorbid with Pulmonary Hypertension or Right Heart Dysfunction

Inhaled epoprostenol (iEPO) has been utilized to improve oxygenation in mechanically ventilated subjects with severe hypoxemia, but the evidence for iEPO via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is rare. Following approval by the institutional review board, this retrospective cohort study evaluated subjects who received iEPO via HFNC for more than 30 min to treat severe hypoxemia comorbid with pulmonary hypertension or right heart dysfunction between July 2015 and April 2018. A total of 11 subjects were enrolled in the study of whom 4 were male (36.4%), age 57.5 ± 22.1 years, and APACHE II score at ICU admission was 18.5 ± 5.7. Ten subjects had more than three chronic heart or lung comorbidities; seven of them used home oxygen. After inhaling epoprostenol, subjects' SpO₂/F_IO₂ ratio improved from 107.5 ± 26.3 to 125.5 ± 31.6 (p = 0.026) within 30-60 min. Five subjects (45.5%) had SpO₂/F_IO₂ improvement >20%, which was considered as a positive response. Heart rate, blood pressure, and respiratory rate were not significantly different. Seven subjects did not require intubation, and seven subjects were discharged home. This retrospective study demonstrated the feasibility of iEPO via HFNC in improving oxygenation. Careful titration of flow while evaluating subjects' response may help identify responders and avoid delaying other interventions. This study supports the need for a larger prospective randomized control trial to further evaluate the efficacy of iEPO via HFNC in improving outcomes.

The Ratio of Nasal Cannula Gas Flow to Patient Inspiratory Flow on Trans-nasal Pulmonary Aerosol Delivery for Adults: An in Vitro Study

Trans-nasal aerosol deposition during distressed breathing is higher than quiet breathing, and decreases as administered gas flow increases. We hypothesize that inhaled dose is related to the ratio of gas flow to patient inspiratory flow (GF:IF). An adult manikin (Laerdal) with a collecting filter placed at trachea was connected to a dual-chamber model lung, which was driven by a ventilator to simulate quiet and distressed breathing with different inspiratory flows. Gas flow was set at 5, 10, 20, 40 and 60 L/min. Albuterol (2.5mg in 1 mL) was nebulized by vibrating mesh nebulizer at the inlet of humidifier at 37 °C for each condition (n = 3). Drug was eluted from the filter and assayed with UV spectrophotometry (276 nm). GF:IF was the primary predictor of inhaled dose (p < 0.001). When the ratio was < 1.0, the inhaled dose was higher than ratio > 1.0 (21.8 ± 3.8% vs. 9.0 ± 3.7%, p < 0.001), and the inhaled dose was similar between quiet and distressed breathing (22.3 ± 5.0% vs. 21.3 ± 2.7%, p = 0.379). During trans-nasal aerosol delivery, GF:IF primarily affected the inhaled dose. Compared to the ratio above 1.0, the ratio below 1.0 produced a higher and more-consistent inhaled dose.