Chen Xiukai, Albuainain Fai A, Li Jie
Dr. Chen, Mrs. Albuainain, and Dr. Li are affiliated with Division of Respiratory Care, Department of Cardiopulmonary Sciences, Rush University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Dr. Chen is affiliated with Department of Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Xiamen University, Xiamen, China.
Respir Care. 2025 Jul;70(7):873-878. doi: 10.1089/respcare.12467. Epub 2025 Mar 5.
Heated and humidified high-flow (HHHF) oxygen therapy is frequently used for spontaneous breathing tracheostomized patients. However, the efficacy of in-line placement of nebulizer via HHHF remains unclear. We aimed to assess the impact of nebulizer placements, flow settings, and interfaces on aerosol delivery using a vibrating mesh nebulizer with HHHF in a tracheostomized model. A simulated spontaneous breathing model of a tracheostomized adult with tracheostomy tube size 8.0 mm was utilized. A collecting filter was placed between the tracheostomy tube and the model lung. Albuterol sulfate (2.5 mg/3 mL) was aerosolized via a vibrating mesh nebulizer in-line with HHHF (Airvo2). The aerosol delivery was evaluated with the nebulizer placed distally (near the humidifier) and proximally to the airway, using tracheostomy adapter and tracheostomy collar at gas flows of 15, 30, and 45 L/min. Each condition was tested five times. The drug was eluted from the collecting filter and assayed with ultraviolet spectrophotometry (276 nm). When delivering aerosol via an in-line vibrating mesh nebulizer with HHHF in a tracheostomized model, the inhaled dose increased as flow decreased, regardless of the interfaces and nebulizer placements (all < .05). With the tracheostomy adapter, distal placement resulted in higher inhaled doses than the proximal placement at all flows (all < .05). With the tracheostomy collar, inhaled doses were lower with distal placement than proximal placement, except at 15 L/min (21.3 ± 1.9 vs 16.4 ± 2.1%, = .009). Compared with the tracheostomy adapter, the tracheostomy collar had higher inhaled doses with the vibrating mesh nebulizer placed proximally at 30 and 45 L/min but a lower inhaled dose with the vibrating mesh nebulizer placed distally at 30 L/min. During aerosol delivery via in-line placement of vibrating mesh nebulizer with HHHF in a tracheostomized model, the inhaled dose increased as flow decreased. Distal nebulizer placement resulted in higher inhaled doses than proximal placement with the tracheostomy adapter at all flows and with the tracheostomy collar at 15 L/min.
温热湿化高流量(HHHF)氧疗常用于气管切开后自主呼吸的患者。然而,通过HHHF进行雾化器在线放置的疗效仍不明确。我们旨在使用带有HHHF的振动网式雾化器,在气管切开模型中评估雾化器放置位置、流量设置和接口对气溶胶输送的影响。使用了一个气管切开管尺寸为8.0毫米的成年气管切开模拟自主呼吸模型。在气管切开管和模型肺之间放置一个收集过滤器。硫酸沙丁胺醇(2.5毫克/3毫升)通过与HHHF(Airvo2)联用的振动网式雾化器进行雾化。在气体流量为15、30和45升/分钟时,使用气管切开适配器和气管切开颈圈,将雾化器分别放置在气道的远端(靠近加湿器)和近端,评估气溶胶输送情况。每种情况测试5次。药物从收集过滤器中洗脱出来,用紫外分光光度法(276纳米)进行测定。在气管切开模型中通过与HHHF联用的在线振动网式雾化器输送气溶胶时,无论接口和雾化器放置位置如何,随着流量降低,吸入剂量增加(均P<0.05)。使用气管切开适配器时,在所有流量下,远端放置的吸入剂量均高于近端放置(均P<0.05)。使用气管切开颈圈时,除了在15升/分钟时,远端放置的吸入剂量低于近端放置(21.3±1.9%对16.4±2.1%,P=0.009)。与气管切开适配器相比,在30和45升/分钟时,近端放置振动网式雾化器时,气管切开颈圈的吸入剂量更高,但在30升/分钟时,远端放置振动网式雾化器时,气管切开颈圈的吸入剂量更低。在气管切开模型中通过与HHHF联用的在线振动网式雾化器输送气溶胶期间,随着流量降低,吸入剂量增加。在所有流量下,使用气管切开适配器时,远端雾化器放置的吸入剂量高于近端放置;在15升/分钟时,使用气管切开颈圈时也是如此。