Literature DB >> 23344853

Good Cascade Impactor Practice (GCIP) and considerations for "in-use" specifications.

S C Nichols1, J P Mitchell, C M Shelton, D L Roberts.   

Abstract

The multi-stage cascade impactor (CI) is widely used to determine aerodynamic particle size distributions (APSDs) of orally inhaled products. Its size-fractionating capability depends primarily on the size of nozzles of each stage. Good Cascade Impactor Practice (GCIP) requires that these critical dimensions are linked to the accuracy of the APSD measurement based on the aerodynamic diameter size scale. Effective diameter (Deff) is the critical dimension describing any nozzle array, as it is directly related to stage cut-point size (d50). d50 can in turn be determined by calibration using particles of known aerodynamic diameter, providing traceability to the international length standard. Movements in Deff within manufacturer tolerances for compendial CIs result in the worst case in shifts in d50 of <±10%. Stage mensuration therefore provides satisfactory control of measurement accuracy. The accurate relationship of Deff to d50 requires the CI system to be leak-free, which can be checked by sealing the apparatus at the entry to the induction port and isolating it from the vacuum source and measuring the rate of pressure rise before each use. Mensuration takes place on an infrequent basis compared with the typical interval between individual APSD determinations. Measurement of stage flow resistance (pressure drop; ΔPstage) could enable the user to know that the CI stages are fit for use before every APSD measurement, by yielding an accurate measure of Deff. However, more data are needed to assess the effects of wear and blockage before this approach can be advocated as part of GCIP.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23344853      PMCID: PMC3581645          DOI: 10.1208/s12249-012-9905-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AAPS PharmSciTech        ISSN: 1530-9932            Impact factor:   3.246


  19 in total

1.  Impact of oropharyngeal deposition on inhaled dose.

Authors:  M Dolovich; R Rhem
Journal:  J Aerosol Med       Date:  1998

2.  Considerations for the development and practice of cascade impaction testing, including a mass balance failure investigation tree.

Authors:  Dave Christopher; Paul Curry; Bill Doub; Kenneth Furnkranz; Martin Lavery; Karl Lin; Svetlana Lyapustina; Jolyon Mitchell; Brian Rogers; Helen Strickland; Terrence Tougas; Yi Tsong; Bruce Wyka
Journal:  J Aerosol Med       Date:  2003

3.  Next generation pharmaceutical impactor (a new impactor for pharmaceutical inhaler testing). Part II: Archival calibration.

Authors:  Virgil A Marple; Bernard A Olson; Kumaragovindham Santhanakrishnan; Jolyon P Mitchell; Sharon C Murray; Buffy L Hudson-Curtis
Journal:  J Aerosol Med       Date:  2003

4.  Evaluation of preseparator performance for the 8-stage nonviable andersen impactor.

Authors:  V V Sethuraman; A J Hickey
Journal:  AAPS PharmSciTech       Date:  2001-03-26       Impact factor: 3.246

Review 5.  Cascade impactors for the size characterization of aerosols from medical inhalers: their uses and limitations.

Authors:  Jolyon P Mitchell; Mark W Nagel
Journal:  J Aerosol Med       Date:  2003

6.  Next generation pharmaceutical impactor: a new impactor for pharmaceutical inhaler testing. Part III. extension of archival calibration to 15 L/min.

Authors:  Virgil A Marple; Bernard A Olson; Kumaragovindhan Santhanakrishnan; Daryl L Roberts; Jolyon P Mitchell; Buffy L Hudson-Curtis
Journal:  J Aerosol Med       Date:  2004

7.  Reducing bounce effects in the Andersen cascade impactor.

Authors:  Craig Dunbar; Abdo Kataya; Tiba Tiangbe
Journal:  Int J Pharm       Date:  2005-09-14       Impact factor: 5.875

8.  Variability in size distribution measurements obtained using multiple Andersen Mark II cascade impactors.

Authors:  S W Stein; B A Olson
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 4.200

9.  Adapting the Abbreviated Impactor Measurement (AIM) concept to make appropriate inhaler aerosol measurements to compare with clinical data: a scoping study with the "Alberta" idealized throat (AIT) inlet.

Authors:  Jolyon Mitchell; Mark Copley; Yvonne Sizer; Theresa Russell; Derek Solomon
Journal:  J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.849

10.  A sampler for respiratory health hazard assessment.

Authors:  A A Andersen
Journal:  Am Ind Hyg Assoc J       Date:  1966 Mar-Apr
View more
  5 in total

1.  Aerosol Delivery of siRNA to the Lungs. Part 1: Rationale for Gene Delivery Systems.

Authors:  Susanne R Youngren-Ortiz; Nishant S Gandhi; Laura España-Serrano; Mahavir B Chougule
Journal:  Kona       Date:  2015-09-30       Impact factor: 2.897

2.  Particle sizing of pharmaceutical aerosols via direct imaging of particle settling velocities.

Authors:  Rami Fishler; Frank Verhoeven; Wilbur de Kruijf; Josué Sznitman
Journal:  Eur J Pharm Sci       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 4.384

Review 3.  Nanoparticle Delivery Platforms for RNAi Therapeutics Targeting COVID-19 Disease in the Respiratory Tract.

Authors:  Yuan Zhang; Juhura G Almazi; Hui Xin Ong; Matt D Johansen; Scott Ledger; Daniela Traini; Philip M Hansbro; Anthony D Kelleher; Chantelle L Ahlenstiel
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2022-02-22       Impact factor: 5.923

4.  Multivariate Analysis of Effects of Asthmatic Patient Respiratory Profiles on the In Vitro Performance of a Reservoir Multidose and a Capsule-Based Dry Powder Inhaler.

Authors:  Francesca Buttini; Irene Pasquali; Gaetano Brambilla; Diego Copelli; Massimiliano Dagli Alberi; Anna Giulia Balducci; Ruggero Bettini; Viviana Sisti
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2015-11-16       Impact factor: 4.200

5.  Droplet Size and Distribution of Nebulized 3% Sodium Chloride, Albuterol, and Epoprostenol by Phase Doppler Particle Analyzer.

Authors:  Kelly McDermott; Jason G Oakley
Journal:  Curr Ther Res Clin Exp       Date:  2021-02-18
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.