Publication: Lung Deposition and Inspiratory Flow Rate in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Using Different Inhalation Devices: A Systematic Literature Review and Expert Opinion
| dc.contributor.author | Baloira, Adolfo | |
| dc.contributor.author | Abad, Araceli | |
| dc.contributor.author | Fuster Gomila, Antonia | |
| dc.contributor.author | Garcia Rivero, Juan Luis | |
| dc.contributor.author | Garcia-Sidro, Patricia | |
| dc.contributor.author | Marquez-Martin, Eduardo | |
| dc.contributor.author | Palop, Marta | |
| dc.contributor.author | Soler, Nestor | |
| dc.contributor.author | Velasco, JL | |
| dc.contributor.author | Gonzalez-Torralba, Fernando | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-09-18T06:42:06Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2024-09-18T06:42:06Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2021 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Background: Our aim was to describe: 1) lung deposition and inspiratory flow rate; 2) main characteristics of inhaler devices in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods: A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to analyze the features and results of inhaler devices in COPD patients. These devices included pressurized metered-dose inhalers (pMDIs), dry powder inhalers (DPIs), and a soft mist inhaler (SMI). Inclusion and exclusion criteria were established, as well as search strategies (Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library up to April 2019). In vitro and in vivo studies were included. Two reviewers selected research articles, collected and analyzed data independently. Narrative searches complemented the SLR. We discussed the results of the reviews in a nominal group meeting and agreed on various general principles and recommendations. Results: The SLR included 71 research articles, some were of low-moderate quality, and there was great variability regarding populations and outcomes. Lung deposition rates varied across devices: 8%-53% for pMDIs, 7%-69% for DPIs, and 39%-67% for the SMI. The aerosol exit velocity was high with pMDIs (more than 3 m/s), while it is much slower (0.84-0.72 m/s) with the SMI. In general, pMDIs produce large-sized presearch articles (1.22-8 mu m), DPIs produce medium-sized presearch articles (1.8-4.8 mu m), and 60% of the presearch articles reach an aerodynamic diameter <5 mu m with the SMI. All inhalation devices reach central and peripheral lung regions, but the SMI distribution pattern might be better compared with pMDIs. DPIs' intrinsic resistance is higher than that of pMDIs and SMI, which are relatively similar and low. Depending on the DPI, the minimum flow inspiratory rate required was 30 L/min. pMDIs and SMI did not require a high inspiratory flow rate. Conclusion: Lung deposition and inspiratory flow rate are key factors when selecting an inhalation device in COPD patients. | en |
| dc.description.sponsorship | The project was funded by Boehringer-Ingelheim. Boehringer-Ingelheim had no role in the design of the study, the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data, and the writing of the manuscript. The authors received no direct compensation related to the develop-ment of the manuscript. Boehringer Ingelheim was given the opportunity to review the manuscript for medical and scientific accuracy as well as intellectual property considerations. | es_ES |
| dc.format.page | 1021-1033 | es_ES |
| dc.format.volume | 16 | es_ES |
| dc.identifier.citation | Baloira A, Abad A, Fuster A, Rivero JLG, Garcia-Sidro P, Marquez-Martin E, et al. Lung Deposition and Inspiratory Flow Rate in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Using Different Inhalation Devices: A Systematic Literature Review and Expert Opinion. Int J Chronic Obstr Pulm Dis. 2021;16:1021-33. | en |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.2147/COPD.S297980 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1178-2005 | |
| dc.identifier.journal | International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease | es_ES |
| dc.identifier.other | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13003/19675 | |
| dc.identifier.pubmedID | 33907390 | es_ES |
| dc.identifier.pui | L2007097786 | |
| dc.identifier.scopus | 2-s2.0-85105094985 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12105/23165 | |
| dc.identifier.wos | 648300800001 | |
| dc.language.iso | eng | en |
| dc.publisher | Dove Medical Press | |
| dc.relation.publisherversion | https://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S297980 | en |
| dc.rights.accessRights | open access | en |
| dc.rights.license | Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International | * |
| dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ | * |
| dc.subject | COPD | |
| dc.subject | Lung deposition | |
| dc.subject | Inspiratory flow | |
| dc.subject | Inhalation devices | |
| dc.subject | Systematic literature review | |
| dc.subject.decs | Testimonio de Experto | * |
| dc.subject.decs | Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica | * |
| dc.subject.decs | Broncodilatadores | * |
| dc.subject.decs | Humanos | * |
| dc.subject.decs | Diseño de Equipo | * |
| dc.subject.decs | Pulmón | * |
| dc.subject.decs | Inhaladores de Dosis Medida | * |
| dc.subject.decs | Administración por Inhalación | * |
| dc.subject.decs | Inhaladores de Polvo Seco | * |
| dc.subject.mesh | Lung | * |
| dc.subject.mesh | Dry Powder Inhalers | * |
| dc.subject.mesh | Equipment Design | * |
| dc.subject.mesh | Administration, Inhalation | * |
| dc.subject.mesh | Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive | * |
| dc.subject.mesh | Expert Testimony | * |
| dc.subject.mesh | Humans | * |
| dc.subject.mesh | Bronchodilator Agents | * |
| dc.subject.mesh | Metered Dose Inhalers | * |
| dc.title | Lung Deposition and Inspiratory Flow Rate in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Using Different Inhalation Devices: A Systematic Literature Review and Expert Opinion | en |
| dc.type | review article | en |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| relation.isPublisherOfPublication | ba22643b-836b-4738-8dc3-444eb4bd4ec4 | |
| relation.isPublisherOfPublication.latestForDiscovery | ba22643b-836b-4738-8dc3-444eb4bd4ec4 |


