ArticleAdvanced pharmaceutical bulletin2025
An Insight Into the Aerosolization Pattern of Formoterol Fumarate Dry Powder Inhalation Formulation Actuated Via Two Different Inhaler Devices.
Article in Advanced pharmaceutical bulletin, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Effective inhaled drug delivery is essential for managing bronchial asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This study compared the aerosolization efficiency of two different dry powder inhalers (DPIs), the Aerolizer and Revolizer, using a fixed formulation of formoterol fumarate. Methods: Aerodynamic particle size distribution was measured using a next-generation impactor (NGI), and delivered dose uniformity was assessed with a dosage unit sampling apparatus (DUSA), both at a fixed flow rate of 60 L/min. Drug content was quantified using a validated high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method, and performance metrics were analyzed using CITDAS software. Data were averaged (mean±SD) and compared by statistical tests (e.g., ANOVA or t-tests), with Results: The Aerolizer achieved a fine particle dose (FPD) of 4.71 µg, which was 2.39 times higher than that of the Revolizer (1.97 µg). It also delivered approximately 20% greater overall dose and showed more consistent deposition in the NGI stages. While both devices demonstrated similar fine particle fractions (FPFS), the difference in FPD was primarily due to the higher emitted dose from the Aerolizer. The use of a fixed flow rate allowed direct comparison of device performance. Conclusion: These findings highlight the significant influence of device design on DPI performance, even when the formulation remains constant. The Aerolizer, a low-resistance inhaler, showed superior delivery efficiency than the Revolizer under standardized conditions. Future studies should include pressure-drop-adjusted or patient-simulated testing to better reflect clinical inhalation profiles and further explore how device mechanics influence drug delivery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.