4.7 Article

A new methodology for targeting drug-aerosols in the human respiratory system

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER
Volume 51, Issue 23-24, Pages 5578-5589

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2008.04.052

Keywords

Drug-aerosol inhalers; Targeted drug-aerosol delivery; Methodology for smart inhaler system; Experimental verification of new methodology

Funding

  1. NIH [8R21EB006717-02]
  2. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys
  3. Directorate For Engineering [0834054] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Inhalation of medicine for the treatment of lung and other diseases is becoming more and more a preferred option when compared to injection or oral intake. Unfortunately, existing devices such as the popular pressurized metered dose inhalers and dry powder inhalers have rather low deposition efficiencies and their drug-aerosol deliveries are non-directional. This is acceptable when the medicine is inexpensive and does not cause systemic side effects, as it may be the case for patients with mild asthma. However, the delivery of aggressive chemicals, or expensive insulin, vaccines and genetic material embedded in porous particles or droplets requires optimal targeting of such inhaled drug-aerosols to predetermined lung areas. The new methodology introduces the idea of a controlled air-particle stream which provides maximum, patient-specific drug-aerosol deposition based on optimal particle diameter and density, inhalation waveform, and particle-release position. The efficacy of the new methodology is demonstrated with experimentally validated computer simulations of two-phase flow in a human oral airway model with two different sets of tracheobronchial airways. Physical insight to the dynamics of the controlled air-particle stream is provided as well. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available