Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mitigating Fugitive Aerosols During Aerosol Delivery via High-Flow Nasal Cannula Devices.
Li, Jie; A Alolaiwat, Amnah; J Harnois, Lauren; Fink, James B; Dhand, Rajiv.
  • Li J; Department of Cardiopulmonary Sciences, Division of Respiratory Care, Rush University, Chicago, Illinois. Jie_Li@rush.edu.
  • A Alolaiwat A; Department of Cardiopulmonary Sciences, Division of Respiratory Care, Rush University, Chicago, Illinois.
  • J Harnois L; Department of Cardiopulmonary Sciences, Division of Respiratory Care, Rush University, Chicago, Illinois.
  • Fink JB; Department of Cardiopulmonary Sciences, Division of Respiratory Care, Rush University, Chicago, Illinois; and Aerogen Pharma Corp, San Mateo, California.
  • Dhand R; Department of Medicine, University of Tennessee Graduate School of Medicine, Knoxville, Tennessee.
Respir Care ; 67(4): 404-414, 2022 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1520112
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Aerosol delivery via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) has attracted clinical interest in recent years. However, both HFNC and nebulization are categorized as aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs). In vitro studies raised concerns that AGPs had high transmission risk. Very few in vivo studies examined fugitive aerosols with nebulization via HFNC, and effective methods to mitigate aerosol dispersion are unknown.

METHODS:

Two HFNC devices (Airvo 2 and Vapotherm) with or without a vibrating mesh nebulizer were compared; HFNC alone, surgical mask over HFNC interface, and HFNC with face tent scavenger were used in a random order for 9 healthy volunteers. Fugitive aerosol concentrations at sizes of 0.3-10.0 µm were continuously measured by particle sizers placed at 1 and 3 ft from participants. On a different day, 6 of the 9 participants received 6 additional nebulizer treatments via vibrating mesh nebulizer or small-volume nebulizer (SVN) with a face mask or a mouthpiece with/without an expiratory filter. In vitro simulation was employed to quantify inhaled dose of albuterol with vibrating mesh nebulizer via Airvo 2 and Vapotherm.

RESULTS:

Compared to baseline, neither HFNC device generated higher aerosol concentrations. Compared to HFNC alone, vibrating mesh nebulizer via Airvo 2 generated higher 0.3-1.0 µm particles (all P < .05), but vibrating mesh nebulizer via Vapotherm did not. Concentrations of 1.0-3.0 µm particles with vibrating mesh nebulizer via Airvo 2 were similar with vibrating mesh nebulizer and a mouthpiece/face mask but less than SVN with a mouthpiece/face mask (all P < .05). Placing a surgical mask over HFNC during nebulization reduced 0.5-1.0 µm particles (all P < .05) to levels similar to the use of a nebulizer with mouthpiece and expiratory filter. In vitro the inhaled dose of albuterol with vibrating mesh nebulizer via Airvo 2 was ≥ 6 times higher than vibrating mesh nebulizer via Vapotherm.

CONCLUSIONS:

During aerosol delivery via HFNC, Airvo 2 generated higher inhaled dose and consequently higher fugitive aerosols than Vapotherm. Simple measures, such as placing a surgical mask over nasal cannula during nebulization via HFNC, could effectively reduce fugitive aerosol concentrations.
Subject(s)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Bronchodilator Agents / Cannula Type of study: Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Respir Care Year: 2022 Document Type: Article

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Bronchodilator Agents / Cannula Type of study: Prognostic study / Randomized controlled trials Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Respir Care Year: 2022 Document Type: Article