Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Pharmaceutical Fronts 2023; 05(03): e175-e186
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1772193
Original Article

A Technical Feasibility of Aqueous Aerosol Generation Based on the Flashing Jet: Effects of Overheat Degree, Jetting Rate, Jetting Volume, and Liquid Type

Qi-Wen Zheng‡   #
1   National Advance Medical Engineering Research Center, China State Institute of Pharmaceutical Industry Co., Ltd., Shanghai, People's Republic of China
,
Li-Jia Yuan‡   #
2   Center for Drug Evaluation, National Medical Products Administration, Beijing, People's Republic of China
,
Jian Wang
1   National Advance Medical Engineering Research Center, China State Institute of Pharmaceutical Industry Co., Ltd., Shanghai, People's Republic of China
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

A previously established flashing jet inhaler prototype (FJ prototype) can produce an aqueous aerosol but cannot steadily provide inhalable aerosol (2–5 μm). This study aims to optimize the atomization performance of the FJ prototype and generate inhalable aqueous aerosols. The effects of overheat degree, jetting rate, jetting volume, and liquid type on atomization performance were assessed by determining output aerosol's mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) and aerodynamic particle size distribution. Drug distribution of active ingredients in different liquid types was also measured. A Pari nebulizer was used as a reference device. Our data suggested that MMAD is negatively correlated with the overheat degree and jetting rate, but has no significant relationship with the jetting volume. The effect of jetting rate is weaker than that of the overheat degree. When normal saline was used as the atomization liquid, output aerosol's MMAD at the FJ prototype and Pari nebulizer were 1.98 ± 0.18 and 2.50 ± 0.81 μm, respectively. The addition of a surfactant significantly decreases MMAD both in solution and in suspension, but the suspended particles had no effect on the residual level and atomization performance of the FJ prototype. When ventolin was used as the atomization liquid, the MMAD of the FJ prototype and Pari nebulizer was 2.1 ± 0.2 and 1.7 ± 0.2 μm, respectively, while the fine particle dosage (FPD) in percent of the nominal dose (%ND) was 50.4 ± 3.1 and 53.1 ± 7.2%, respectively. When pulmicort respules was used as the atomization liquid, the MMAD of the FJ prototype and Pari nebulizer was 2.5 ± 0.5 and 4.6 ± 0.2 μm respectively, while the FPD (%ND) was 30.1 ± 5.6 and 58.6 ± 5.1%, respectively. The FJ prototype not only delivers inhalable aqueous aerosol but also has a potential advantage in the atomization of suspension or poorly soluble drugs.

Keywords

flashing jet - FJ prototype - atomization performance - mass median aerodynamic diameter

# These authors contributed equally to this work.




Publication History

Received: 03 February 2023

Accepted: 11 July 2023

Article published online:
18 August 2023

© 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • Reference

  • 1 Anderson S, Atkins P, Bäckman P. et al. Inhaled medicines: past, present, and future. Pharmacol Rev 2022; 74 (01) 48-118
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Laube BL. The expanding role of aerosols in systemic drug delivery, gene therapy and vaccination: an update. Transl Respir Med 2014; 2: 3
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Newman SP. Drug delivery to the lungs: challenges and opportunities. Ther Deliv 2017; 8 (08) 647-661
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Hickey AJ. Emerging trends in inhaled drug delivery. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2020; 157: 63-70
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 de Boer AH, Hagedoorn P, Gjaltema D, Goede J, Frijlink HW. Air classifier technology (ACT) in dry powder inhalation Part 3. Design and development of an air classifier family for the Novolizer multi-dose dry powder inhaler. Int J Pharm 2006; 310 (1–2): 72-80
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Farkas D, Hindle M, Bonasera S, Bass K, Longest W. Development of an inline dry powder inhaler for oral or trans-nasal aerosol administration to children. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv 2020; 33 (02) 83-98
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Kakade PP, Versteeg HK, Hargrave GK, Genova P, Williams Iii RC, Deaton D. Design optimization of a novel pMDI actuator for systemic drug delivery. J Aerosol Med 2007; 20 (04) 460-474
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Shrewsbury SB, Armer TA, Newman SP, Pitcairn G. Breath-synchronized plume-control inhaler for pulmonary delivery of fluticasone propionate. Int J Pharm 2008; 356 (1–2): 137-143
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Ochowiak M, Kasperkowiak A, Doligalski M. et al. The thermostated medical jet nebulizer: aerosol characteristics. Int J Pharm 2019; 567: 118475
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Qi A, Friend JR, Yeo LY, Morton DA, McIntosh MP, Spiccia L. Miniature inhalation therapy platform using surface acoustic wave microfluidic atomization. Lab Chip 2009; 9 (15) 2184-2193
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Frijlink HW, de Boer AH. Trends in the technology-driven development of new inhalation devices. Drug Discov Today Technol 2005; 2 (01) 47-57
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Geller DE. Comparing clinical features of the nebulizer, metered-dose inhaler, and dry powder inhaler. Respir Care 2005; 50 (10) 1313-1321 , discussion 1321–1322
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Respiratory protective devices for self-rescue-filter self-rescuer from carbon monoxide with mouthpiece assembly: I.S. EN 404:2005. Ireland: National Standards Authority of Ireland, 2005
  • 14 McCarthy SD, González HE, Higgins BD. Future trends in nebulized therapies for pulmonary disease. J Pers Med 2020; 10 (02) 37
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Ari A, Fink JB. Recent advances in aerosol devices for the delivery of inhaled medications. Expert Opin Drug Deliv 2020; 17 (02) 133-144
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Dalby R, Spallek M, Voshaar T. A review of the development of Respimat Soft Mist Inhaler. Int J Pharm 2004; 283 (1–2): 1-9
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Dalby RN, Eicher J, Zierenberg B. Development of Respimat(®) Soft Mist™ Inhaler and its clinical utility in respiratory disorders. Med Devices (Auckl) 2011; 4: 145-155
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Ciciliani AM, Langguth P, Wachtel H. In vitro dose comparison of Respimat® inhaler with dry powder inhalers for COPD maintenance therapy. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2017; 12: 1565-1577
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Ge Y, Tong Z, Li R. et al. Numerical and experimental investigation on key parameters of the Respimat® spray inhaler. Processes (Basel) 2021; 9 (01) 44
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Sher E, Bar-Kohany T, Rashkovan A. Flash-boiling atomization. Prog Energ Combust 2008; 34 (04) 417-439
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Witlox H, Harper M, Bowen P, Cleary V. Flashing liquid jets and two-phase droplet dispersion II. Comparison and validation of droplet size and rainout formulations. J Hazard Mater 2007; 142 (03) 797-809
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Jiang X, Siamas GA, Jagus K. et al. Physical modelling and advanced simulations of gas–liquid two-phase jet flows in atomization and sprays. Prog Energ Combust 2010; 36 (02) 131-167
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Dumouchel C. On the experimental investigation on primary atomization of liquid streams. Exp Fluids 2008; 45 (03) 371-422
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Li G, Li C. Experimental study on the spray steadiness of an internal-mixing twin-fluid atomizer. Energy 2021; 226: 120394
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Bar-Kohany T, Levy M. State of the art review of flash-boiling atomization. At Sprays 2016; 26 (12) 1259-1305
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 El-Fiqi AK, Ali NH, El-Dessouky HT, Fath HS, EI-Hefni MA. Flash evaporation in a superheated water liquid jet. Desalination 2007; 206 (01) 311-321
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Brown R, York JL. Sprays formed by flashing liquid jets. AIChE J 1962; 8 (02) 149-153
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Calay RK, Holdo AE. Modelling the dispersion of flashing jets using CFD. J Hazard Mater 2008; 154 (1–3): 1198-1209
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Polanco G, Holdø AE, Munday G. General review of flashing jet studies. J Hazard Mater 2010; 173 (1–3): 2-18
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Fathinia F, Al-Abdeli YM, Khiadani M. Evaporation rates and temperature distributions in fine droplet flash evaporation sprays. Int J Therm Sci 2019; 145: 106037
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Zhu X, Song Z, Pan X, Wang X, Jiang J. Critical superheat for flashing of superheated liquid jets. Ind Eng Chem Fundam 1986; 25 (02) 206-211
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Zhu X, Song Z, Pan X, Wang X, Jiang J. Pressure-decay and thermodynamic characteristics of subcooled liquid in the tank and their interaction with flashing jets. J Hazard Mater 2019; 378: 120578
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Chen Q, Ja MK, Li Y, Chua KJ. Experimental and mathematical study of the spray flash evaporation phenomena. Appl Therm Eng 2018; 130: 598-610
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Lobry E, Berthe JE, Spitzer D. Spray flash evaporation SFE process: identification of the driving parameters on evaporation to tune particle size and morphology. Chem Eng Sci 2021; 231: 116307
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Witlox HWM, Harper M, Oke A. et al. Sub-cooled and flashing liquid jets and droplet dispersion I. Overview and model implementation/validation. J Loss Prevent Proc 2010; 23 (06) 831-842
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Cleary V, Bowen P, Witlox H. Flashing liquid jets and two-phase droplet dispersion I. Experiments for derivation of droplet atomisation correlations. J Hazard Mater 2007; 142 (03) 786-796
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Xiong P, He S, Qiu F. et al. Experimental and mathematical study on jet atomization and flash evaporation characteristics of droplets in a depressurized environment. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 2021; 123: 185-198
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Mitchell JP, Nagel MW, Wiersema KJ, Doyle CC. Aerodynamic particle size analysis of aerosols from pressurized metered-dose inhalers: comparison of Andersen 8-stage cascade impactor, next generation pharmaceutical impactor, and model 3321 Aerodynamic Particle Sizer aerosol spectrometer. AAPS PharmSciTech 2003; 4 (04) E54
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Harris JA, Stein SW, Myrdal PB. Evaluation of the TSI aerosol impactor 3306/3321 system using a redesigned impactor stage with solution and suspension metered-dose inhalers. AAPS PharmSciTech 2006; 7 (01) E20
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Liu HM. Science and engineering of droplets: fundamentals and applications. Appl Mech Rev 2002; 55 (01) B16-B7
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Hoeve W, Gekle S, Snoeijer J. et al. Breakup of diminutive Rayleigh jets. Phys Fluids 2010; 22: 122003
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Anderson M, Collison K, Drummond MB. et al. Peak inspiratory flow rate in COPD: an analysis of clinical trial and real-world data. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis 2021; 16: 933-943
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Evans JA, Whitelaw WA. The assessment of maximal respiratory mouth pressures in adults. Respir Care 2009; 54 (10) 1348-1359
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Westerdahl E, Gunnarsson M, Wittrin A, Nilsagård Y. Pulmonary function and respiratory muscle strength in patients with multiple sclerosis. Mult Scler Int 2021; 2021: 5532776
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Gorokhovski M, Herrmann M. Modeling primary atomization. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 2008; 40: 343-366
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Mc Callion ONM, Taylor KMG, Thomas M, Taylor AJ. The influence of surface tension on aerosols produced by medical nebulisers. Int J Pharm 1996; 129 (1–2): 123-136
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Steckel H, Eskandar F. Factors affecting aerosol performance during nebulization with jet and ultrasonic nebulizers. Eur J Pharm Sci 2003; 19 (05) 443-455
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Barry PW, O'Callaghan C. An in vitro analysis of the output of salbutamol from different nebulizers. Eur Respir J 1999; 13 (05) 1164-1169
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Chang KH, Moon SH, Oh JY. et al. Comparison of salbutamol delivery efficiency for jet versus mesh nebulizer using mice. Pharmaceutics 2019; 11 (04) 192
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 50 Zhou Y, Ahuja A, Irvin CM, Kracko DA, McDonald JD, Cheng YS. Medical nebulizer performance: effects of cascade impactor temperature. Respir Care 2005; 50 (08) 1077-1082
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 51 Smyth H, Hickey AJ, Brace G, Barbour T, Gallion J, Grove J. Spray pattern analysis for metered dose inhalers I: orifice size, particle size, and droplet motion correlations. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 2006; 32 (09) 1033-1041
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar