TY - JOUR
T1 - In vitro evaluation of aerosol delivery of aztreonam lysine (AZLI)
T2 - an adult mechanical ventilation model
AU - Rodríguez, Alejandro
AU - Cabrera, María
AU - Reyes, Luis F.
AU - Bodí, María
AU - Trefler, Sandra
AU - Canadell, Laura
AU - Barahona, Diego
AU - Ehrmann, Stepham
AU - Martin-Loeches, Ignacio
AU - Restrepo, Marcos I.
AU - Vecellio, Laurent
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
PY - 2017/12/2
Y1 - 2017/12/2
N2 - Background: The delivery profile of Aztreonam lysine (AZLI) during mechanical ventilation (MV) is unknown. We evaluated the amount of AZLI drug delivered using an in vitro model of adult MV. Methods: An adult lung model designed to mimic current clinical practice was used. Both nebulizers were placed before a Y-piece and 4 settings were tested: A) Aeroneb solo® [AS] with a t-piece; B) AS with the spacer; C) M-Neb® [MN] with a t-piece and D) MN with the spacer. Performance was evaluated in terms of: 1) Mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD); 2) Geometric standard deviation (GSD), 3) Fine particle dose (FPD), 4) Fine particle fraction (FPF), 5) Inhalable mass (IM), and 6) Recovery rate (RR). Results: Both devices showed an adequate delivery of AZLI during MV, with MMAD between 2.4–2.5 µm and 87% of FPF. The FPD (38.8 and 31.7), IM (44.8 and 36.1) and RR (30 and 24) were similar for AS and MN respectively. Nebulizer aerosol delivery increased (50 and 70% respectively) for both nebulizers when using the spacer. Conclusion: Both AS and MN showed a good aerosol delivery profile for AZLI during in vitro mechanical ventilation. Better aerosol delivery performance was obtained using the spacer.
AB - Background: The delivery profile of Aztreonam lysine (AZLI) during mechanical ventilation (MV) is unknown. We evaluated the amount of AZLI drug delivered using an in vitro model of adult MV. Methods: An adult lung model designed to mimic current clinical practice was used. Both nebulizers were placed before a Y-piece and 4 settings were tested: A) Aeroneb solo® [AS] with a t-piece; B) AS with the spacer; C) M-Neb® [MN] with a t-piece and D) MN with the spacer. Performance was evaluated in terms of: 1) Mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD); 2) Geometric standard deviation (GSD), 3) Fine particle dose (FPD), 4) Fine particle fraction (FPF), 5) Inhalable mass (IM), and 6) Recovery rate (RR). Results: Both devices showed an adequate delivery of AZLI during MV, with MMAD between 2.4–2.5 µm and 87% of FPF. The FPD (38.8 and 31.7), IM (44.8 and 36.1) and RR (30 and 24) were similar for AS and MN respectively. Nebulizer aerosol delivery increased (50 and 70% respectively) for both nebulizers when using the spacer. Conclusion: Both AS and MN showed a good aerosol delivery profile for AZLI during in vitro mechanical ventilation. Better aerosol delivery performance was obtained using the spacer.
KW - Aztreonam lysine
KW - aerosol delivery
KW - in vitro model
KW - mechanical ventilation
KW - nebulized antibiotic
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85031898901&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85031898901&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/17425247.2017.1393411
DO - 10.1080/17425247.2017.1393411
M3 - Article
C2 - 29041861
AN - SCOPUS:85031898901
SN - 1742-5247
VL - 14
SP - 1447
EP - 1453
JO - Expert Opinion on Drug Delivery
JF - Expert Opinion on Drug Delivery
IS - 12
ER -