This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Methacholine challenge testing (MCT) is a common bronchoprovocation technique used to assess airway hyper-responsiveness. We previously demonstrated that the addition of a viral filter to the nebulizer exhalation limb substantially reduced expelled particles during MCT. Our aim was to evaluate whether this modification affects the delivered dose of methacholine.
METHODS: A mechanical ventilator was connected to a lung simulator with breathing frequency 15 breaths/min, tidal volume 500 mL, inspiratory-expiratory ratio 1:1, with a sinusoidal waveform. We compared methacholine dose delivery using the Hudson Micro Mist or AeroEclipse II BAN nebulizers powered by either a dry gas source or a compressor system. A filter placed in line between the nebulizer and test lung was weighed before and after 1 min of nebulized methacholine delivery. Mean inhaled mass was measured with and without a viral filter on the exhalation limb. Dose delivery was calculated by multiplying the mean inhaled mass by the respirable fraction (particles < 5 μm) and inhalation time. Unpaired t test was used to compare methacholine dose delivery with and without viral filter placement.
RESULTS: The addition of a viral filter did not significantly affect methacholine dose delivery across all devices tested. Using a 50-psi dry gas source, dose delivered with or without a viral filter did not differ with the Hudson (422.3 μg vs 282.0 μg, P = .11) or the AeroEclipse nebulizer (563.0 μg vs 657.6 μg, P = .59). Using the compressor, dose delivered with and without a viral filter did not differ with the Hudson (974.0 μg vs 868.0 μg, P = .03) or the AeroEclipse nebulizer (818.0 μg vs 628.5 μg, P = .42).
CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a viral filter to the nebulizer exhalation limb did not affect methacholine dose during bronchoprovocation testing. Routine use of a viral filter should be considered to improve pulmonary function technician safety and infection control measures during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
Footnotes
- Correspondence: Alexander S Niven MD, Pulmonary Function Laboratory, Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street, SW, Rochester, MN, 55905. E-mail: niven.alexander{at}mayo.edu
See the Related Editorial on Page 1058
The authors have disclosed no conflicts of interest.
No external sources of funding were involved in this study.
Supplementary material related to this paper is available at http://www.rcjournal.com.
- Copyright © 2022 by Daedalus Enterprises
Pay Per Article - You may access this article (from the computer you are currently using) for 1 day for US$30.00
Regain Access - You can regain access to a recent Pay per Article purchase if your access period has not yet expired.
