Brazilian Journal of Pulmonology

ISSN (on-line): 1806-3756 | ISSN (printed): 1806-3713

SBPT

Publication continuous and bimonthly

SCImago Journal & Country Rank
Advanced Search

 

Current Issue: 2016 - Volume 42 - Number 3 (May/June)

CORRESPONDENCE

Inhalation therapy in mechanical ventilation

Terapia inalatória em ventilação mecânica

 

Ângelo Roncalli Miranda Rocha1; 2; 3; Caio Henrique Veloso da Costa1

 

1. UTI Geral, Hospital Geral do Estado Professor Osvaldo Brandão Vilela, Maceió (AL) Brasil.
2. UTI, Hospital Escola Dr. Hélvio Auto, Universidade Estadual de Ciências da Saúde de Alagoas, Maceió (AL) Brasil.
3. Centro de Estudos Superiores de Maceió, Maceió (AL) Brasil.


 

 

 

Devices that produce aerosol particles of < 2 µm in mass median aerodynamic diameter are more efficient during me-chanical ventilation than are those that produce larger particles. Other factors influencing aerosol drug delivery to me-chanically ventilated patients include the aerosol-generating device, the condition of the ventilator circuit, the artificial airway, and the ventilator settings. Next-generation nebulizers known as vibrating membrane nebulizers or vibrating mesh nebulizers have recently been developed, their aerosol delivery efficiency having been estimated to be twice to three times as high as that of jet nebulizers.

Ari et al.(1) conducted an experimental study comparing jet nebulizers and vibrating membrane nebulizers in terms of their efficacy in simulated pediatric and adult lung models during mechanical ventilation. The authors found that drug (albuterol sulfate) delivery was 2- to 4-fold greater with a vibrating mesh nebulizer than with a jet nebulizer (p = 0.001). It is of note that active humidification was used in that study.

Given the wide range of variables that can influence inhaled drug delivery to patients on mechanical ventilation, we read with great interest the review article by Maccari et al.(2) However, we found it surprising that the authors did not include vibrating membrane nebulizers among the nebulizers for use in mechanically ventilated patients. In addition, Figure 1 in the aforementioned study(2) shows a heat and moisture exchanger. The authors reported that the use of humid-ifying devices reduces aerosol deposition and the number of deposited particles by as much as 40%. An update of the American Association for Respiratory Care guidelines recommends that filtered heat and moisture exchangers be re-moved during nebulization. (3) This can be confusing and misleading to the reader.

REFERENCES

1. Ari A, Atalay OT, Harwood R, Sheard MM, Aljamhan EA, Fink JB. Influence of nebulizer type, position, and bias flow on aerosol drug delivery in simulated pediatric and adult lung models during mechanical ventilation. Respir Care. 2010;55(7):845-51.
2. Maccari JG, Teixeira C, Gazzana MB, Savi A, Dexheimer-Neto FL, Knorst MM. Inhalation therapy in mechanical ventilation. J Bras Pneumol. 2015;41(5):467-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1806-37132015000000035
3. American Association for Respiratory Care, Restrepo RD, Walsh BK. Humidification during invasive and noninvasive mechanical ventilation: 2012. Respir Care. 2012;57(5):782-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.4187/respcare.01766

 

 


The Brazilian Journal of Pulmonology is indexed in:

Latindex Lilacs SciELO PubMed ISI Scopus Copernicus pmc

Support

CNPq, Capes, Ministério da Educação, Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia, Governo Federal, Brasil, País Rico é País sem Pobreza
Secretariat of the Brazilian Journal of Pulmonology
SCS Quadra 01, Bloco K, Salas 203/204 Ed. Denasa. CEP: 70.398-900 - Brasília - DF
Fone/fax: 0800 61 6218/ (55) (61) 3245 1030/ (55) (61) 3245 6218
E-mails: jbp@jbp.org.br
jpneumo@jornaldepneumologia.com.br

Copyright 2019 - Brazilian Thoracic Association

Logo GN1