4.1 Article

Excipient Enhanced Growth Aerosol Surfactant Replacement Therapy in an In Vivo Rat Lung Injury Model

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/jamp.2020.1593

关键词

compliance; EEG Survanta powder aerosol; elastance; inflammation; resistance; surfactant depletion; ventilation mechanics

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01HL139673]
  2. NIH-NCI Cancer Center Support Grant [P30 CA016059]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: In neonatal respiratory distress syndrome, breathing support and surfactant therapy are commonly used to enable the alveoli to expand. Surfactants are typically delivered through liquid instillation. However, liquid instillation does not specifically target the small airways. We have developed an excipient enhanced growth (EEG) powder aerosol formulation using Survanta(R). Methods: EEG Survanta powder aerosol was delivered using a novel dry powder inhaler via tracheal insufflation to surfactant depleted rats at nominal doses of 3, 5, 10, and 20 mg of powder containing 0.61, 0.97, 1.73, and 3.46 mg of phospholipids (PL), whereas liquid Survanta was delivered via syringe instillation at doses of 2 and 4 mL/kg containing 18.6 and 34 mg of PL. Ventilation mechanics were measured before and after depletion, and after treatment. We hypothesized that EEG Survanta powder aerosol would improve lung mechanics compared with instilled liquid Survanta in surfactant depleted rats. Results and Conclusion: EEG Survanta powder aerosol at a dose of 0.61 mg PL significantly improved lung compliance and elastance compared with the liquid Survanta at a dose of 18.6 mg, which represents improved primary efficacy of the aerosol at a 30-fold lower dose of PL. There was no significant difference in white blood cell count of the lavage from the EEG Survanta group compared with liquid Survanta. These results provide an in vivo proof-of-concept for EEG Survanta powder aerosol as a promising method of surfactant replacement therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据