Gregory Reychler1, Anne-Sophie Aubriot2, Virginie Depoortere3, François Jamar3, Giuseppe Liistro4. 1. Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique, Pôle de Pneumologie, ORL et Dermatologie, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium. Service de Pneumologie gregory.reychler@uclouvain.be. 2. Centre de Référence pour la Mucoviscidose. 3. Service de Médecine Nucléaire, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium. 4. Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique, Pôle de Pneumologie, ORL et Dermatologie, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium. Service de Pneumologie.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent technological advances in nebulization permit researchers to target specific parts of the lungs by modifying delivery method. The aim of this study was to compare the central and peripheral targeted modalities of administration. METHODS: Lung and regional deposition of inhaled technetium-99m diethylene triamine penta-acetic was measured by scintigraphy after peripheral and central targeted modalities of administration with an Akita device in 6 healthy subjects. RESULTS:Drug targeting nebulization delivered a large amount of drug into the peripheral part of the lung independent of the modality (outer-to-inner deposition ratio of 1.24 ± 0.21 vs. 1.22 ± 0.14 for central and peripheral modalities, respectively), but there was no difference in lung deposition (whole-body deposition, 83.3 ± 6.5% vs. 82.8 ± 7.3%, P = .86) or regional deposition (P = .77) between both modalities. The extrathoracic deposition was < 20% of the whole-body deposition, without a difference between modalities (P = .86). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows for the first time that choosing 2 different specific drug targeting nebulization modes does not influence the amount of drug delivered into the lung in healthy male subjects. Moreover, the modes do not modify the site of deposition under the conditions of our study.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Recent technological advances in nebulization permit researchers to target specific parts of the lungs by modifying delivery method. The aim of this study was to compare the central and peripheral targeted modalities of administration. METHODS: Lung and regional deposition of inhaled technetium-99m diethylene triamine penta-acetic was measured by scintigraphy after peripheral and central targeted modalities of administration with an Akita device in 6 healthy subjects. RESULTS: Drug targeting nebulization delivered a large amount of drug into the peripheral part of the lung independent of the modality (outer-to-inner deposition ratio of 1.24 ± 0.21 vs. 1.22 ± 0.14 for central and peripheral modalities, respectively), but there was no difference in lung deposition (whole-body deposition, 83.3 ± 6.5% vs. 82.8 ± 7.3%, P = .86) or regional deposition (P = .77) between both modalities. The extrathoracic deposition was < 20% of the whole-body deposition, without a difference between modalities (P = .86). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows for the first time that choosing 2 different specific drug targeting nebulization modes does not influence the amount of drug delivered into the lung in healthy male subjects. Moreover, the modes do not modify the site of deposition under the conditions of our study.