ABSTRACT
Background: Currently the Center for Disease Control has advised the use of face coverings to prevent transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) to those who are unvaccinated. This study seeks to evaluate if cloth masks have increased efficiency with the addition of a filter material. Methods: An adult airway and test lung model were exposed to nebulized ‘coarse’ aerosol droplets (0.5-11 µm) and humidified ‘fine’ water vapor particles (0.03-0.05 µm). Aerosol was quantified based on particles deposited on the face, airway and lung model. Tracheal humidity levels characterized fine particle permeability. Both phases of testing were conducted by evaluating the following testing conditions: 1) no mask;2) cloth mask;3) cloth mask with Swiffer™ filter;4) cloth mask with Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MN1 -https://media.proquest.com/media/hms/PFT/1/hK3pM?_a=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%3D%3D&_s=7m0CVC1lZWe%2FPfCJ7CyMM2ys0bg%3D ERV) 15 filter;4) cloth mask with PM2.5 filter 5) surgical mask and 6) N95 respirator. Results: All mask conditions provided greater filtration from coarse particles when compared to no mask (P<0.05). All cloth mask with filter combinations were better at stopping fine particles in comparison to no mask. A cloth mask without a filter and surgical mask performed similarly to no mask with fine particles (P<0.05). The cloth mask with MERV 15 filter and the surgical mask performed similarly to the N95 with course particles, while the cloth mask with Swiffer™ performed similarly to the N95 with the fine particles (P<0.05). Conclusions: Respiratory viruses including SARS-CoV-2 and influenza are spread through exposure to respiratory secretions that are aerosolized by infected individuals. The findings from this study suggest that a mask can filter these potentially infectious airborne particles.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Effective treatment options for surfactant therapy in acute respiratory distress syndrome and coronavirus disease 2019 have not been established. To conduct preclinical studies in vitro and in vivo to evaluate efficiency, particle size, dosing, safety, and efficacy of inhaled surfactant using a breath-synchronized, nebulized delivery system in an established acute respiratory distress syndrome model. DESIGN: Preclinical study. SETTING: Research laboratory. SUBJECTS: Anesthetized pigs. INTERVENTION: In vitro analysis included particle size distribution and inhaled dose during simulated ventilation using a novel breath-synchronized nebulizer. Physiologic effects of inhaled aerosolized surfactant (treatment) were compared with aerosolized normal saline (control) in an adult porcine model (weight of 34.3 ± 0.6 kg) of severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (Pao2/Fio2 <100) with lung lavages and ventilator-induced lung injury during invasive ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Mass median aerosol diameter was 2.8 µm. In vitro dose delivered distal to the endotracheal tube during mechanical ventilation was 85% ± 5%. Nebulizers were functional up to 20 doses of 108 mg of surfactant. Surfactant-treated animals (n = 4) exhibited rapid improvement in oxygenation with nearly full recovery of Pao2/Fio2 (~300) and end-expiratory lung volumes with nominal dose less than 30 mg/kg of surfactant, whereas control subjects (n = 3) maintained Pao2/Fio2 less than 100 over 4.5 hours with reduced end-expiratory lung volume. There was notably greater surfactant phospholipid content and lower indicators of lung inflammation and pathologic lung injury in surfactant-treated pigs than controls. There were no peridosing complications associated with nebulized surfactant, but surfactant-treated animals had progressively higher airway resistance post treatment than controls with no differences in ventilation effects between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Breath-synchronized, nebulized bovine surfactant appears to be a safe and feasible treatment option for use in coronavirus disease 2019 and other severe forms of acute respiratory distress syndrome.