Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32006290›Full record

ArticleIntensive care medicine experimental2020

In vitro comparison between inspiration synchronized and continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer during trans-nasal aerosol delivery.

Jie Li, Wei Wu, James B Fink

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Intensive care medicine experimental, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. High-flow nasal cannula in severe asthma exacerbations: current evidence and clinical perspectives.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025
    Review
  2. Journal of aerosol medicine and pulmonary drug delivery · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Hypertonic saline jet nebulization breathing treatments produce a predictable quantity of aerosolized sodium chloride for inhalation.Canadian journal of respiratory therapy : CJRT = Revue canadienne de la therapie respiratoire : RCTR · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jie LiDepartment of Cardiopulmonary Sciences, Division of Respiratory Care, Rush University Medical Center, 1620 W Harrison St, Tower LL1202, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA. Jie_Li@rush.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0121-1291
Wei WuDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Shanghai Zhongshan Hospital, Fu Dan University, Shanghai, China.
James B FinkDepartment of Cardiopulmonary Sciences, Division of Respiratory Care, Rush University Medical Center, 1620 W Harrison St, Tower LL1202, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA.
Rush University Medical Center · USZhongshan Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCompared to continuous vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN), inspiration synchronized VMN has shown increased inhaled dose during noninvasive ventilation; however, its use during aerosol delivery via high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) is still unknown.

methodsAn adult manikin was connected to a dual-chamber model lung, which was driven by a critical care ventilator to simulate spontaneous breathing. A HFNC system was utilized with temperature at 37 ° C while gas flow at 5, 10, 20, 40, and 60 L/min. Inspiration synchronized and continuous aerosol generation were compared at different positions (at the inlet of humidifier vs close to patient). One milliliter of albuterol (2.5 mg/mL) was used in each run (n = 3). Collection filter was placed at the trachea and was removed after each run. Drug was eluted from the filter and assayed with UV spectrophotometry (276 nm).

resultsWhen nebulizer was placed close to patient, inhaled dose was higher with inspiration synchronized than continuous aerosol generation at all gas flows (p = 0.05) except at 5 L/min. When placed at the inlet of humidifier, compared to continuous, inspiration synchronized aerosol generated higher inhaled dose with gas flow set below 50% of patient inspiratory flow [23.9 (20.6, 28.3)% vs 18.1 (16.7, 19.6)%, p < 0.001], but lower inhaled dose with gas flow set above 50% of patient inspiratory flow [3.5 (2.2, 9.3)% vs 9.9 (8.2, 16.4)%, p = 0.001]. Regardless of breathing pattern, continuous aerosol delivered greater inhaled dose with nebulizer placed at humidifier than close to patient at all gas flows except at 5 L/min.

conclusionWhen the HFNC gas flow was set higher than 50% of patient inspiratory flow, no significant advantage was found in inspiration synchronized over continuous aerosol. However, inspiration synchronized aerosol generated 30% more inhaled dose than continuous with gas flow set below 50% of patient inspiratory flow, regardless of nebulizer placement. Continuous nebulizer needs to be placed at the inlet of humidifier.

Indexed as

Continuous aerosolHigh-flow nasal cannulaInspiration synchronized nebulizerVibrating mesh nebulizer

Identifiers

PMID32006290
PMCPMC6994578
OpenAlexW3010049171

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.