• Ashwin A Gowda, Ann D Cuccia, and Gerald C Smaldone.
• Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, New York ashwin.gowda@stonybrook.edu.
• Respir Care. 2017 Jan 1; 62 (1): 65-69.

BackgroundFor delivery of inhaled aerosols, vibrating mesh systems are more efficient than jet nebulizers are and do not require added gas flow. We assessed the reliability of a vibrating mesh nebulizer (Aerogen Solo, Aerogen Ltd, Galway Ireland) suitable for use in mechanical ventilation.MethodsAn initial observational study was performed with 6 nebulizers to determine run time and efficiency using normal saline and distilled water. Nebulizers were run until cessation of aerosol production was noted, with residual volume and run time recorded. Three controllers were used to assess the impact of the controller on nebulizer function. Following the observational study, a more detailed experimental protocol was performed using 20 nebulizers. For this analysis, 2 controllers were used, and time to cessation of aerosol production was noted. Gravimetric techniques were used to measure residual volume. Total nebulization time and residual volume were recorded. Failure was defined as premature cessation of aerosol production represented by residual volume of > 10% of the nebulizer charge.ResultsIn the initial observational protocol, an unexpected sporadic failure rate was noted of 25% in 55 experimental runs. In the experimental protocol, a failure rate was noted of 30% in 40 experimental runs. Failed runs in the experimental protocol exhibited a wide range of retained volume averaging ± SD 36 ± 21.3% compared with 3.2 ± 1.5% (P = .001) in successful runs. Small but significant differences existed in nebulization time between controllers.ConclusionsAerogen Solo nebulization was often randomly interrupted with a wide range of retained volumes.Copyright © 2017 by Daedalus Enterprises.

15 keywords...

hide…