Display options
Cite
Greenblatt EE, Winkler T, Harris RS, et al. What Causes Uneven Aerosol Deposition in the Bronchoconstricted Lung? A Quantitative Imaging Study. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2015;29(1):57-75doi: 10.1089/jamp.2014.1197.
Greenblatt, E. E., Winkler, T., Harris, R. S., Kelly, V. J., Kone, M., Katz, I., Martin, A. R., Caillibotte, G., & Venegas, J. (2016). What Causes Uneven Aerosol Deposition in the Bronchoconstricted Lung? A Quantitative Imaging Study. Journal of aerosol medicine and pulmonary drug delivery, 29(1), 57-75. https://doi.org/10.1089/jamp.2014.1197
Greenblatt, Elliot Eliyahu, et al. "What Causes Uneven Aerosol Deposition in the Bronchoconstricted Lung? A Quantitative Imaging Study." Journal of aerosol medicine and pulmonary drug delivery vol. 29,1 (2016): 57-75. doi: https://doi.org/10.1089/jamp.2014.1197
Greenblatt EE, Winkler T, Harris RS, Kelly VJ, Kone M, Katz I, Martin AR, Caillibotte G, Venegas J. What Causes Uneven Aerosol Deposition in the Bronchoconstricted Lung? A Quantitative Imaging Study. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2016 Feb;29(1):57-75. doi: 10.1089/jamp.2014.1197. Epub 2015 May 15. PMID: 25977979; PMCID: PMC4770852.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2016 Feb;29(1):57-75. doi: 10.1089/jamp.2014.1197. Epub 2015 May 15.

What Causes Uneven Aerosol Deposition in the Bronchoconstricted Lung? A Quantitative Imaging Study.

Journal of aerosol medicine and pulmonary drug delivery

Elliot Eliyahu Greenblatt, Tilo Winkler, Robert Scott Harris, Vanessa Jane Kelly, Mamary Kone, Ira Katz, Andrew R Martin, George Caillibotte, Jose Venegas

Affiliations

  1. 1 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology , Boston, Massachusetts.
  2. 2 Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School , Boston, Massachusetts.
  3. 3 R&D Medical , Air Liquide Santé International, Les-Loges-en-Josas, France .
  4. 4 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Lafayette College , Easton, Pennsylvania.
  5. 5 Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta , Edmonton, Alberta, Canada .

PMID: 25977979 PMCID: PMC4770852 DOI: 10.1089/jamp.2014.1197

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A previous PET-CT imaging study of 14 bronchoconstricted asthmatic subjects showed that peripheral aerosol deposition was highly variable among subjects and lobes. The aim of this work was to identify and quantify factors responsible for this variability.

METHODS: A theoretical framework was formulated to integrate four factors affecting aerosol deposition: differences in ventilation, in how air vs. aerosol distribute at each bifurcation, in the fraction of aerosol escaping feeding airways, and in the fraction of aerosol reaching the periphery that is exhaled. These factors were quantified in 12 of the subjects using PET-CT measurements of relative specific deposition sD*, relative specific ventilation sV* (measured with dynamic PET or estimated as change in expansion between two static HRCTs), average lobar expansion F

RESULTS: The fraction of the variance of sD* explained by sV* (0.38), by bifurcation effects (0.38), and by differences in deposition along feeding airways (0.31) were similar in magnitude. We could not directly estimate the contribution of aerosol that was exhaled. Differences in expansion did not explain any fraction of the variability in sD* among lobes. The dependence of sD* on sV* was high in subjects breathing with low f

CONCLUSION: The theoretical framework allowed us to analyze experimentally measured aerosol deposition imaging data. When considering bronchoconstricted asthmatic subjects, a dynamic measurement of ventilation is required to evaluate its effect on aerosol transport. The mechanisms behind the identified effects of f

Keywords: aerosol deposition; asthma; bronchoconstriction; escape fractions; sedimentation; ventilation

References

  1. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2012 Jun;25(3):140-7 - PubMed
  2. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2015 Apr;28(2):116-29 - PubMed
  3. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2013 Feb;26(1):1-8 - PubMed
  4. Lung. 2001;179(3):137-45 - PubMed
  5. J Appl Physiol (1985). 1996 Nov;81(5):2203-13 - PubMed
  6. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005 Dec 15;172(12 ):1497-504 - PubMed
  7. J Aerosol Med. 2001 Winter;14 (4):443-54 - PubMed
  8. Ann Biomed Eng. 2012 Jul;40(7):1495-507 - PubMed
  9. Radiology. 2010 Dec;257(3):854-62 - PubMed
  10. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1984 Jul;130(1):64-70 - PubMed
  11. J Aerosol Med. 2000 Winter;13(4):387-91 - PubMed
  12. J Appl Physiol Respir Environ Exerc Physiol. 1983 Mar;54(3):821-6 - PubMed
  13. J Appl Physiol (1985). 2012 Sep;113(6):947-57 - PubMed
  14. J Appl Physiol (1985). 1997 Mar;82(3):943-53 - PubMed
  15. J Appl Physiol (1985). 2011 Jun;110(6):1664-73 - PubMed
  16. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv. 2014 Oct;27(5):341-8 - PubMed
  17. J Appl Physiol (1985). 2011 Jul;111(1):48-54 - PubMed
  18. J Aerosol Med. 2004 Fall;17 (3):278-85 - PubMed
  19. J Appl Physiol (1985). 2013 Feb 15;114(4):504-14 - PubMed
  20. Chest. 1994 Feb;105(2):396-401 - PubMed
  21. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 1980 Jun;41(6):399-409 - PubMed

Publication Types