Literature DB >> 17411402

Modeling of aerosol deposition with interface devices.

W H Finlay1, A R Martin.   

Abstract

Various approaches can be used to mathematically model the performance of different masks, mouthpieces, and aerosol delivery devices. The sophistication of such models can vary widely, from the use of simple algebraic empirical correlations to advanced computational fluid dynamics simulations. Bench-top testing is also often used to model aspects of devices, since it is difficult to capture certain aspects of device behavior with mathematical models. These various approaches to modeling differ in their limitations. Empirical correlations exist for predicting the effects of varying mouthpiece diameter and mouth-throat dimensions on extrathoracic losses, but are restricted to stable, nonballistic aerosols in certain flow rate ranges. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations that solve the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations typically require near-wall turbulence corrections in order to adequately model mouth-throat deposition, while Large Eddy Simulation (LES) removes this deficiency. Bench-top models that use replicas of the extrathoracic airways vary in their accuracy and generality in replicating the filtering properties of these airways. Choosing and using these various modeling approaches for evaluating patient-device interfaces requires knowledge of their merits and pitfalls, a brief discussion of which is given here.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17411402     DOI: 10.1089/jam.2007.0554

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Aerosol Med        ISSN: 0894-2684


  8 in total

1.  Comparing MDI and DPI aerosol deposition using in vitro experiments and a new stochastic individual path (SIP) model of the conducting airways.

Authors:  P Worth Longest; Geng Tian; Ross L Walenga; Michael Hindle
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 4.200

Review 2.  Devices for Improved Delivery of Nebulized Pharmaceutical Aerosols to the Lungs.

Authors:  Worth Longest; Benjamin Spence; Michael Hindle
Journal:  J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv       Date:  2019-07-09       Impact factor: 2.849

3.  Validating Whole-Airway CFD Predictions of DPI Aerosol Deposition at Multiple Flow Rates.

Authors:  P Worth Longest; Geng Tian; Navvab Khajeh-Hosseini-Dalasm; Michael Hindle
Journal:  J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv       Date:  2016-04-15       Impact factor: 2.849

Review 4.  In silico models of aerosol delivery to the respiratory tract - development and applications.

Authors:  P Worth Longest; Landon T Holbrook
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2011-05-27       Impact factor: 15.470

Review 5.  Use of computational fluid dynamics deposition modeling in respiratory drug delivery.

Authors:  P Worth Longest; Karl Bass; Rabijit Dutta; Vijaya Rani; Morgan L Thomas; Ahmad El-Achwah; Michael Hindle
Journal:  Expert Opin Drug Deliv       Date:  2018-12-10       Impact factor: 6.648

6.  Characterizing the Effects of Nasal Prong Interfaces on Aerosol Deposition in a Preterm Infant Nasal Model.

Authors:  Karl Bass; Mohammad A M Momin; Connor Howe; Ghali Aladwani; Sarah Strickler; Arun V Kolanjiyil; Michael Hindle; Robert M DiBlasi; Worth Longest
Journal:  AAPS PharmSciTech       Date:  2022-04-19       Impact factor: 3.246

7.  Prevalence and factors associated with suboptimal peak inspiratory flow rates in COPD.

Authors:  Sohini Ghosh; Roy A Pleasants; Jill A Ohar; James F Donohue; M Bradley Drummond
Journal:  Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis       Date:  2019-03-01

8.  Methods for evaluation of helium/oxygen delivery through non-rebreather facemasks.

Authors:  Andrew R Martin; Ira M Katz; Yonatan Lipsitz; Karine Terzibachi; Georges Caillibotte; Joëlle Texereau
Journal:  Med Gas Res       Date:  2012-12-17
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.