Individualized aerosol medicine: Integrating device into the patient.

Pulmonary drug delivery is complex due to several challenges including disease-, patient-, and clinicians-related factors. Although many inhaled medications are available in aerosol medicine, delivering aerosolized medications to patients requires effective disease management. There is a large gap in the knowledge of clinicians who select and provide instructions for the correct use of aerosol devices. Since improper device selection, incorrect inhaler technique, and poor patient adherence to prescribed medications may result in inadequate disease control, individualized aerosol medicine is essential for effective disease management and control. The components of individualized aerosol medicine include: (1) Selecting the right device, (2) Selecting the right interface, (3) Educating the patient effectively, and (4) Increasing patient adherence to therapy. This paper reviews each of these components and provides recommendations to integrate the device and interface into the patient for better clinical outcomes.

In-vitro and in-vivo comparisons of high versus low concentrations of inhaled epoprostenol to adult intubated patients.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled epoprostenol (iEPO) has been shown to reduce pulmonary artery pressure and improve oxygenation. iEPO is mainly delivered via a syringe pump with feed tubing connected to a vibrating mesh nebulizer with high or low formulation concentration delivery. METHODS: An in vitro study and a two-period retrospective case-control study were implemented. The in vitro study compared iEPO delivery via invasive ventilation at low concentrations of 7.5, and 15 mcg/mL and high concentration at 30 mcg/mL, to deliver the ordered dose of 30 and 50 ng/kg/min for three clinical scenarios with predicted body weight of 50, 70 and 90 kg. While in the clinical study, adult patients receiving iEPO via invasive ventilation to treat refractory hypoxemia, pulmonary hypertension, or right ventricular failure were included. 80 patients received low concentration iEPO at multiple concentrations (2.5, 7.5, and 15 mcg/mL, depending on the ordered dose) from 2015 to 2017, while 84 patients received high concentration iEPO at 30 mcg/mL from 2018 to 2019. RESULTS: In the in vitro study, there were no significant differences in aerosol deposition between high vs low concentrations of iEPO at a dose of 50 ng/kg/min. In the clinical study, age, gender, ethnicity, and indications for iEPO were similar between high and low concentration groups. After 30-120 min of iEPO administration, both delivery strategies significantly improved oxygenation in hypoxemic patients and reduced mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP) for patients with pulmonary hypertension. However, no significant differences of the incremental changes were found between two delivery groups. Compared to low concentration, high concentration delivery group had better adherence to the iEPO weaning protocol (96% vs 71%, p < 0.001), fewer iEPO syringes utilized per patient (5 [3, 10] vs 12 [6, 22], p = 0.001), and shorter duration of invasive ventilation (6 [3, 12] vs 9 [5, 18] days, p = 0.028). Intensive care unit length of stay and mortality were similar between two groups. CONCLUSION: Compared to low concentration delivery of iEPO, high concentration iEPO via a vibrating mesh nebulizer maintained clinical benefits and increased clinician compliance with an iEPO weaning protocol, required less medication preparation time, and shortened duration of invasive ventilation.

Aerosol drug delivery to tracheotomized patients with COVID-19: Pragmatic suggestions for clinicians.

Because of the wide and rapid spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the number of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has rapidly increased medically complex and resource-intensive treatment requirements in health care settings. Although tracheostomy is frequently needed for critically ill patients requiring extended mechanical ventilation, it has been described as an aerosol-generating procedure that puts health care professionals at an increased risk of viral transmission. In addition, the delivery of aerosolized medications to this patient population has become controversial because of concerns on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 via droplets. Although aerosol therapy in spontaneously breathing patients with COVID-19 was described in recent publications, innovations in aerosol drug delivery to COVID-19 patients with tracheostomy have not been presented. Therefore, empirically based guidance on how to deliver aerosols safely and effectively to tracheotomized patients with COVID-19 is still lacking. This paper provides recommendations and rationales for device selection, interface selection, delivery techniques, and infection control based on the evolving body of literature.

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.

Practical strategies to reduce nosocomial transmission to healthcare professionals providing respiratory care to patients with COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is an emerging viral infection that is rapidly spreading across the globe. SARS-CoV-2 belongs to the same coronavirus class that caused respiratory illnesses such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). During the SARS and MERS outbreaks, many frontline healthcare workers were infected when performing high-risk aerosol-generating medical procedures as well as when providing basic patient care. Similarly, COVID-19 disease has been reported to infect healthcare workers at a rate of ~ 3% of cases treated in the USA. In this review, we conducted an extensive literature search to develop practical strategies that can be implemented when providing respiratory treatments to COVID-19 patients, with the aim to help prevent nosocomial transmission to the frontline workers.

Novel Toxicology Program to Support the Development of Inhaled VentaProst.

Currently, off-label continuous administration of inhaled epoprostenol is used to manage hemodynamics during mitral valve surgery. A toxicology program was developed to support the use of inhaled epoprostenol during mechanical ventilation as well as pre- and postsurgery via nasal prongs. To support use in patients using nasal prongs, a Good Laboratory Practice (GLP), 14-day rat, nose-only inhalation study was performed. No adverse findings were observed at ∼50× the dose rate received by patient during off-label use. To simulate up to 48 hours continuous aerosol exposure during mechanical ventilation, a GLP toxicology study was performed using anesthetized, intubated, mechanically ventilated dogs. Dogs inhaled epoprostenol at approximately 6× and 13× the dose rate reported in off-label human studies. This novel animal model required establishment of a dog intensive care unit providing sedation, multisystem support, partial parenteral nutrition, and management of the intubated mechanically ventilated dogs for the 48-hour duration of study. Aerosol was generated by a vibrating mesh nebulizer with novel methods required to determine dose and particle size in-vitro. Continuous pH 10.5 epoprostenol was anticipated to be associated with lung injury; however, no adverse findings were observed. As no toxicity at pH 10.5 was observed with a formulation that required refrigeration, a room temperature stable formulation at pH 12 was evaluated in the same ventilated dog model. Again, there were no adverse findings. In conclusion, current toxicology findings support the evaluation of inhaled epoprostenol at pH 12 in surgical patients with pulmonary hypertension for up to 48 hours continuous exposure.

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.

A randomized, controlled trial of an aerosolized vaccine against measles.

BACKGROUND: Aerosolized vaccine can be used as a needle-free method of immunization against measles, a disease that remains a major cause of illness and death. Data on the immunogenicity of aerosolized vaccine against measles in children are inconsistent. METHODS: We conducted an open-label noninferiority trial involving children 9.0 to 11.9 months of age in India who were eligible to receive a first dose of measles vaccine. Children were randomly assigned to receive a single dose of vaccine by means of either aerosol inhalation or a subcutaneous injection. The primary end points were seropositivity for antibodies against measles and adverse events 91 days after vaccination. The noninferiority margin was 5 percentage points. RESULTS: A total of 1001 children were assigned to receive aerosolized vaccine, and 1003 children were assigned to receive subcutaneous vaccine; 1956 of all the children (97.6%) were followed to day 91, but outcome data were missing for 331 children because of thawed specimens. In the per-protocol population, data on 1560 of 2004 children (77.8%) could be evaluated. At day 91, a total of 662 of 775 children (85.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 82.5 to 88.0) in the aerosol group, as compared with 743 of 785 children (94.6%; 95% CI, 92.7 to 96.1) in the subcutaneous group, were seropositive, a difference of -9.2 percentage points (95% CI, -12.2 to -6.3). Findings were similar in the full-analysis set (673 of 788 children in the aerosol group [85.4%] and 754 of 796 children in the subcutaneous group [94.7%] were seropositive at day 91, a difference of -9.3 percentage points [95% CI, -12.3 to -6.4]) and after multiple imputation of missing results. No serious adverse events were attributable to measles vaccination. Adverse-event profiles were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Aerosolized vaccine against measles was immunogenic, but, at the prespecified margin, the aerosolized vaccine was inferior to the subcutaneous vaccine with respect to the rate of seropositivity. (Funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; Measles Aerosol Vaccine Project Clinical Trials Registry-India number, CTRI/2009/091/000673.).

Aerosol delivery during spontaneous breathing with different types of nebulizers- in vitro/ex vivo models evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Nebulizers for spontaneous breathing have been evaluated through different study designs. There are limitations in simulated bench models related to patient and nebulizer factors. The aim of this study was to determine the correlation of inhaled drug mass between in vitro and ex vivo studies by testing aerosol deposition of various types of nebulizers. METHODS: Ten healthy subjects were recruited to receive aerosol therapy with five nebulizers in random order: 1) a jet nebulizer (JN); 2) a breath-enhanced nebulizer (BEN); 3) a manually triggered nebulizer (MTN), 4) a breath-actuated nebulizer (BAN), and 5) a vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN) with valved-adapter. A unit dose of salbutamol containing 5 mg in 2.5 mL was placed into the nebulizer and administered for 10 min. For the ex vivo study, minute ventilation of healthy subjects was recorded for 1 min. For the in vitro study a breathing simulator was utilized with adult breathing patterns. Aerosolized drug from the nebulizers and the accessory tubes was captured using inspiratory and expiratory collecting filters. Captured drug was eluted, measured and expressed as inhaled and exhaled mass using spectrophotometry at a wavelength of 276 nm. RESULTS: 10 healthy subjects were recruited, aged 20.8 ±â€¯0.7 years old, with a mean height of 166.2 ±â€¯9.2 cm and weight of 64.7 ±â€¯12.4 kg. There was no significant difference in the inhaled drug dose between the JN and BEN (15.0 ±â€¯1.94% and 17.74 ±â€¯2.65%, respectively, p = .763), yet the inhaled doses were lower than the other three nebulizers (p < .001). The VMN delivered greater inhaled dose than the other four nebulizers (p < .01). The respiratory rate of the cohorts was significantly correlated with the inhaled drug dose. For the in vitro model, the JN delivered a lower inhaled dose (11.6 ±â€¯1.6, p < .001) than the other nebulizers, whereas the MTN and BAN deposited significantly lower exhaled doses (1.7 ±â€¯0.4 and 2.7 ±â€¯0.2, respectively, p < .001). The VMN demonstrated a greater drug dose with the in vitro study than the ex vivo model (44.0 ±â€¯0.9% and 35.5 ±â€¯6.3% respectively, p = .003), whereas the JN in the ex vivo model resulted in a greater inhaled drug dose (15.0 ±â€¯1.9% for ex vivo vs 11.6 ±â€¯1.6% for in vitro, p = .008). CONCLUSIONS: These in vitro/ex vivo model comparisons of nebulizers performance indicated that breath-related nebulizers can be estimated using an in vitro model; however, the JN and VMN delivered inhaled drug mass differed between models. There was a significant correlation between respiratory rate and inhaled mass, and the inhaled drug dose generated by VMN correlated with minute ventilation. This study demonstrated that the VMN produced greater inhaled drug dose and lowest residual dose, whereas the BEN, BAN, and MTN produced lower exhaled drug dose in both in vitro and ex vivo models.

Clinical outcome associated with the use of different inhalation method with and without humidification in asthmatic mechanically ventilated patients.

BACKGROUND: Inhaled-medication delivered during mechanical-ventilation is affected by type of aerosol-generator and humidity-condition. Despite many in-vitro studies related to aerosol-delivery to mechanically-ventilated patients, little has been reported on clinical effects of these variables. The aim of this study was to determine effect of humidification and type of aerosol-generator on clinical status of mechanically ventilated asthmatics. METHOD: 72 (36 females) asthmatic subjects receiving invasive mechanical ventilation were enrolled and assigned randomly to 6 treatment groups of 12 (6 females) subjects each received, as possible, all inhaled medication using their assigned aerosol generator and humidity condition during delivery. Aerosol-generators were placed immediately after humidifier within inspiratory limb of mechanical ventilation circuit. First group used vibrating-mesh-nebulizer (Aerogen Solo; VMN) with humidification; Second used VMN without humidification; Third used metered-dose-inhaler with AeroChamber Vent (MDI-AV) with humidification; Forth used MDI-AV without humidification; Fifth used Oxycare jet-nebulizer (JN) with humidification; Sixth used JN without humidification. Measured parameters included clinical-parameters reflected patient response (CP) and endpoint parameters e.g. length-of-stay in the intensive-care-unit (ICU-days) and mechanical-ventilation days (MV-days). RESULTS: There was no significant difference between studied subjects in the 6 groups in baseline of CP. VMN resulted in trend to shorter ICU-days (∼1.42days) compared to MDI-AV (p = 0.39) and relatively but not significantly shorter ICU-days (∼0.75days) compared JN. Aerosol-delivery with or without humidification did not have any significant effect on any of parameters studied with very light insignificant tendency of delivery at humid condition to decrease MV-days and ICU-days. No significant effect was found of changing humidity during aerosol-delivery to ventilated-patient. CONCLUSIONS: VMN to deliver aerosol in ventilated patient resulted in trend to decreased ICU-days compared to JN and MDI-AV. Aerosol-delivery with or without humidification did not have any significant effect on any of parameters studied. However, we recommend increasing the number of patients studied to corroborate this finding.

Good Things in Small Packages: an Innovative Delivery Approach for Inhaled Insulin.

PURPOSE: The design development of a small, hand held, battery operated, breath actuated inhaler as a drug/device platform for inhaled insulin posed a number of technical challenges. Our goal was to optimize lung deposition and distribution with aerosol generators producing 3-6 µm particle size distribution. METHODS: In silico modeling with computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and in vitro testing of device components were assessed using an Alberta idealized adult airway (Copley, UK) to optimize mouthpiece and aerosol path design for dose delivered distal to the trachea. Human factors use testing was designed to determine the ability to perform inspiratory manuevers with LED guidance within target flow limits. In vivo testing with healthy normal subjects of radiolabeled aerosol compared 2 breathing patterns for lung deposition efficiency, distribution, and subject preference. RESULTS: CFD demonstrated that flows ≤5 L/min and ≥15 L/min reduced the delivery efficiencg. Prototypes tested with inspiratory flow of 10 L/min provided up to 70% of dose delivered distal to the model throat with aerosols of 3 to 6 µm. Users guided by LED were able to inhale for 8-24 s with 5 s breath hold. Lung dose >70% with peripheral to central ratios >2.0 were achieved, with subject preference for the longer inspiratory time with breath hold. CONCLUSION: The device design phase integration led to a novel design and inspiratory pattern with greater levels of peripheral deposition than previously reported with commercial inhalers. The rationale and process of the application of these methods are described with implications for use in future device development.

Delivery of Epinephrine in the Vapor Phase for the Treatment of Croup.

OBJECTIVES: The Vapotherm system delivers high humidity to the airway of patients by using semipermeable tubules where heated liquid water is in contact with air. The humidified air is conducted to the patient via a heated tube. Preliminary clinical observations in infants with croup suggested that epinephrine added to the water supplying the humidity was delivered successfully in the vapor phase. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of the delivery of epinephrine in the vapor phase and to develop the feasibility criteria for a clinical pilot study. DESIGN: Thirty milligrams of epinephrine in a 1-L bag of sterile water was used as the humidification source for a Vapotherm 2000i. The output of the heated circuit was condensed and collected into a small Erlenmeyer flask via a metal coil while the whole collection system was submerged in an ice slurry to maintain the outflow temperature from the flask between 0°C and 2°C. The in vitro system was tested at 40°C with flows of 5, 10, and 15 L/min and L-epinephrine concentrations of 15, 30, and 60 mg/L. Each test was duplicated at each of the six conditions. SETTING: Academic children's hospital research laboratory. PATIENTS: None. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The system recovered more than 90% of the water vapor from the fully saturated air at 40°C. The epinephrine concentration recovery quantified by ultraviolet-visible spectrophotometry was 23.9% (27.5-20.4%) (mean and range) of the initial concentration. At flows of 5, 10, and 15 L/min, the delivery of epinephrine would be 1.8, 3.6, and 4.2 µg/min, respectively, which is in the therapeutic range used for parenteral infusion in young children. CONCLUSIONS: The Vapotherm system can be used to deliver epinephrine in pharmacological doses to the respiratory system as a vapor and thus as an alternative to droplets by conventional nebulization.

Nebulizers.

Nebulizers generate aerosols from liquid-based solutions and suspensions. Nebulizers are particularly well suited to delivering larger doses of medication than is practical with inhalers and are used with a broad range of liquid formulations. When the same drug is available in liquid or inhaler form, nebulizers are applicable for use with patients who will not or cannot reliably use a pressurized metered-dosed inhaler (pMDI) or dry powder inhaler (DPI) due to poor lung function, hand-breath coordination, cognitive abilities (e.g., infants, elderly) or device preference. In a nebulizer, liquid medication is placed in a reservoir and fed to an aerosol generator to produce the droplets. A series of tubes and channels direct the aerosol to the patient via an interface such as mouthpiece, mask, tent, nasal prongs or artificial airway. All nebulizers contain these basic parts, although the technology and design used can vary widely and can result in significant difference in ergonomics, directions for use, and performance. While many types of nebulizers have been described, the three categories of modern clinical nebulizers include: (1) pneumatic jet nebulizers (JN); (2) ultrasonic nebulizers (USN); and (3) vibrating mesh nebulizers (VMN). Nebulizers are also described in terms of their reservoir size. Small volume nebulizers (SVNs), most commonly used for medical aerosol therapy, can hold 5 to 20 mL of medication and may be jet, ultrasonic, or mesh nebulizers. Large volume nebulizers, typically jet or ultrasonic nebulizers, hold up to 200 mL and may be used for either bland aerosol therapy or continuous drug administration.

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.

Effect of Interrupting Heated Humidification on Nebulized Drug Delivery Efficiency, Temperature, and Absolute Humidity During Mechanical Ventilation: A Multi-Lab In Vitro Study.

Introduction: During mechanical ventilation (MV), inspired gases require heat and humidification. However, such conditions may be associated with reduced aerosol delivery efficiency. The practice of turning off heated humidification before nebulization and the impact of nebulization on humidity in a dry ventilator circuit remain topics of debate. This study aimed to assess the effect of turning off heated humidification on inhaled dose and humidity with nebulizer use during adult MV. Methods: A bronchodilator (albuterol) and two antibiotics (Colistimethate sodium and Amikacin sulfate) were nebulized with a vibrating mesh nebulizer placed at the humidifier inlet and in the inspiratory limb at the Y-piece. Additionally, albuterol was nebulized using a jet nebulizer in both placements. Aerosol particle size distribution was determined through a cascade impactor. Absolute humidity (AH) and temperature of inspired gases were determined with anemometer/hygrometers before, during, and after nebulization, before, during, and up to 60 minutes after interrupting active humidification. Aerosol collected on a filter distal to the endotracheal tube and on impactor stages were eluted and assayed by spectrophotometry. Results: The inhaled dose was greater when both nebulizers were placed at the humidifier inlet than the inspiratory limb at the Y-piece. Irrespective of the nebulizer types and placements, the inhaled dose either decreased or showed no significant change after the humidifier was turned off. The aerosol particle size ranged from 1.1 to 2.7 µm. With interruption of active humidification, humidity of inspired gas quickly dropped below recommended levels, and nebulization in dry ventilator circuit produced an AH between 10 and 20 mgH2O/L, lower than the recommended minimum of 30 mgH2O/L. Conclusion: Interrupting active humidification during MV before nebulization did not improve aerosol delivery efficiency for bronchodilator or antibiotics, but did reduce humidity below recommended levels.

Inhaler devices for patients with COPD.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) continues to be associated with increased morbidity and mortality risk in spite of updated guidelines and a better understanding of this condition. Progressive airflow limitation and resultant hyperinflation-the respiratory hallmarks of this complex and often under-diagnosed disease-can be treated with pharmacotherapies emitted via nebulizers, pressurized metered-dose inhalers, dry powder inhalers, or a Soft Mist inhaler. Pharmaceutical company proprietary issues, technological innovations, and societal pressure have expanded the list of available inhalers, with a limited range of medications available for any one device. Each device has different operating and maintenance instructions, and successful use of a given drug/device combination requires that patients understand, maintain, and use each of their devices properly in order to ensure consistent and optimal pulmonary drug delivery. Clinicians are faced with a range of physical and psychosocial issues unique to each patient with COPD that must be overcome in order to match a suitable inhaler to the individual. Improved drug delivery afforded by next-generation inhalers, coupled with an awareness of device-specific and patient-specific variables affecting inhaler use, may improve clinical outcomes in the treatment of COPD.

Influence of Mechanical Ventilation Modes on the Efficacy of Nebulized Bronchodilators in the Treatment of Intubated Adult Patients with Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

BACKGROUND: Little has been reported in terms of clinical outcomes to confirm the benefits of nebulized bronchodilators during mechanical ventilation (MV). Electrical Impedance Tomography (EIT) could be a valuable method to elucidate this gap. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of nebulized bronchodilators during invasive MV with EIT by comparing three ventilation modes on the overall and regional lung ventilation and aeration in critically ill patients with obstructive pulmonary disease. METHOD: A blind clinical trial in which eligible patients underwent nebulization with salbutamol sulfate (5 mg/1 mL) and ipratropium bromide (0.5 mg/2 mL) in the ventilation mode they were receiving. EIT evaluation was performed before and after the intervention. A joint and stratified analysis into ventilation mode groups was performed, with p < 0.05. RESULTS: Five of nineteen procedures occurred in controlled MV mode, seven in assisted mode and seven in spontaneous mode. In the intra-group analysis, the nebulization increased total ventilation in controlled (p = 0.04 and ⅆ = 2) and spontaneous (p = 0.01 and ⅆ = 1.5) MV modes. There was an increase in the dependent pulmonary region in assisted mode (p = 0.01 and ⅆ = 0.3) and in spontaneous mode (p = 0.02 and ⅆ = 1.6). There was no difference in the intergroup analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Nebulized bronchodilators reduce the aeration of non-dependent pulmonary regions and increase overall lung ventilation but there was no difference between the ventilation modes. As a limitation, it is important to note that the muscular effort in PSV and A/C PCV modes influences the impedance variation, and consequently the aeration and ventilation values. Thus, future studies are needed to evaluate this effort as well as the time on ventilator, time in UCI and other variables.