1996Pharmaceutical Development and TechnologyRequires access

Comparison of a Respiratory Suspension Aerosolized by an Air-Jet and an Ultrasonic Nebulizer

Susan L. Tiano, Richard N. Dalby

Open publisher page 15 citations

Abstract

In the absence of USP standards and performance monographs, this research sought to determine if differences in the aerosolization mechanism (air-jet vs. ultrasonic) affected droplet and insoluble particle deposition of a nebulized model respiratory suspension. Five milliliters of a model suspension containing 0.1% w/v fluorescein (to estimate droplet deposition) and known quantities of 1, 3, and 6 microns latex spheres (representing insoluble drug particles) was aerosolized from an air-jet and an ultrasonic nebulizer. Nebulized output was collected in a modified Andersen impactor. Samples were analyzed spectrophotometrically (490.5 nm) and by a Coulter Counter to estimate droplet and sphere deposition, respectively. The distribution of droplets throughout the modified impactor for both nebulizers suggested that both the air-jet and the ultrasonic nebulizer produced droplets (0.4 to 10 microns in aerodynamic diameter) large enough to incorporate 1, 3, and 6 microns insoluble spheres. However, Coulter Counter analysis of the sphere distribution revealed that while the air-jet nebulized output contained spheres of all sizes, this was not true for the ultrasonic nebulizer. In the ultrasonic nebulizer, 99% of the spheres (irrespective of size) were not aerosolized and were recovered from the nebulizer reservoir at the aerosolization end point. The results highlight the importance of evaluating performance of a respiratory suspension in combination with a specific nebulizer. When conducting in vitro inertial deposition testing of a respiratory suspension, it is inappropriate to assume that deposition trends of droplets will predict the deposition of the insoluble dispersed phase.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

In the absence of USP standards and performance monographs, this research sought to determine if differences in the aerosolization mechanism (air-jet vs. ultrasonic) affected droplet and insoluble particle deposition of a nebulized model respiratory suspension. Five milliliters of a model suspension containing 0.1% w/v fluorescein (to estimate droplet deposition) and known quantities of 1, 3, and 6 microns latex spheres (representing insoluble drug particles) was aerosolized from an air-jet and an ultrasonic nebulizer. Nebulized output was collected in a modified Andersen impactor. Samples were analyzed spectrophotometrically (490.5 nm) and by a Coulter Counter to estimate droplet and sphere deposition, respectively. The distribution of droplets throughout the modified impactor for both nebulizers suggested that both the air-jet and the ultrasonic nebulizer produced droplets (0.4 to 10 microns in aerodynamic diameter) large enough to incorporate 1, 3, and 6 microns insoluble spheres. However, Coulter Counter analysis of the sphere distribution revealed that while the air-jet nebulized output contained spheres of all sizes, this was not true for the ultrasonic nebulizer. In the ultrasonic nebulizer, 99% of the spheres (irrespective of size) were not aerosolized and were recovered from the nebulizer reservoir at the aerosolization end point. The results highlight the importance of evaluating performance of a respiratory suspension in combination with a specific nebulizer. When conducting in vitro inertial deposition testing of a respiratory suspension, it is inappropriate to assume that deposition trends of droplets will predict the deposition of the insoluble dispersed phase.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 15 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

In the absence of USP standards and performance monographs, this research sought to determine if differences in the aerosolization mechanism (air-jet vs. ultrasonic) affected droplet and insoluble particle deposition of a nebulized model respiratory suspension. Five milliliters of a model suspension containing 0.1% w/v fluorescein (to estimate droplet deposition) and known quantities of 1, 3, and 6 microns latex spheres (representing insoluble drug particles) was aerosolized from an air-jet and an ultrasonic nebulizer. Nebulized output was collected in a modified Andersen impactor. Samples were analyzed spectrophotometrically (490.5 nm) and by a Coulter Counter to estimate droplet and sphere deposition, respectively. The distribution of droplets throughout the modified impactor for both nebulizers suggested that both the air-jet and the ultrasonic nebulizer produced droplets (0.4 to 10 microns in aerodynamic diameter) large enough to incorporate 1, 3, and 6 microns insoluble spheres. However, Coulter Counter analysis of the sphere distribution revealed that while the air-jet nebulized output contained spheres of all sizes, this was not true for the ultrasonic nebulizer. In the ultrasonic nebulizer, 99% of the spheres (irrespective of size) were not aerosolized and were recovered from the nebulizer reservoir at the aerosolization end point. The results highlight the importance of evaluating performance of a respiratory suspension in combination with a specific nebulizer. When conducting in vitro inertial deposition testing of a respiratory suspension, it is inappropriate to assume that deposition trends of droplets will predict the deposition of the insoluble dispersed phase.

Key concepts: Nebulizer, Aerosolization, Ultrasonic sensor, Jet (fluid), Suspension (topology), Materials science, Biomedical engineering, Inhalation

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of a Respiratory Suspension Aerosolized by an Air-Jet and an Ultrasonic Nebulizer — Research Paper | ScholarLens