Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 16, 2026

Evaluation of Respiratory System Mechanics in Mice using the Forced Oscillation Technique
Published on: May 15, 2013
Jet Nebulization During Mechanical Ventilation: Mass Balance Analysis
Sushant Chaudhary1, Ann D Cuccia2, Gerald C Smaldone1
1Drs. Chaudhary and Smaldone are affiliated with Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care and Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, New York, USA.
Background:
The interaction between nebulizer technology and mechanical ventilation can be confusing. Mesh technology has recently been quantified using the mass balance, a technique that measures all aerosol delivered and lost in ventilator circuits. Data for jet nebulizers are limited, and ventilator technology has changed over time. The present study was designed to better define aerosol behavior during jet nebulization by testing device position, gas source, humidification, inspiratory time (TI), and circuit compliance.
Methods:
Using radiolabeled particles, mass balance and output rate were measured for the AeroTech nebulizer placed close to the ventilator (IP), Y-piece (YP), and proximal to ETT (DY) in aerosol HME or humidified settings. The nebulizer was driven continuously (8 L/m, 50 PSIG) or by breath actuation (BA) during volume control ventilation at two inspiratory times (TI 0.7 and 0.55 s). Five ventilators and two circuits with different tubing compliance were tested. Radiolabeled saline (3 mL, Tc99m) was nebulized. A well counter measured filters inhaled and expiratory mass (IM, EM), and nebulizer residual (NR). Tubing deposition was measured with a gamma camera. A shielded ratemeter measured output rate and treatment time.
Results:
Mass balance ranged from 96 to 104% (no. = 66). IM obtained with IP, HME circuit, continuous nebulization (29.8 ± 5%), IP, and BA (26.8 ± 4%); with humidification, continuous (15 ± 1%), BA (27.1 ± 4). Lowest IM at YP position, HME (8.8 ± .6%). Circuit losses ≤20%. EM was lowest for IP (19.2 ± 2%) and highest for YP and DY (46 ± 3%). NR was higher with BA (43.1 ± 6 vs 37.1 ± 3, P = .002). Higher tubing compliance lowered IM (21.8 ± .7% vs 28.3 ± 3% [no. = 9], P = .01). Treatment time for IP, continuous, HME circuit (10 min), and BA circuit (50 min). Changing TI (0.55 s) reduced IM and further increased treatment time.
Conclusions:
Optimal conditions for jet nebulization were IP position, HME circuit, continuous nebulization, and stiff tubing. Humidification should be supplied with an aerosol HME. If active humidification, IP breath-actuated was most efficient but with marked increase in treatment time.
More Related Videos
07:28Dry Powder and Nebulized Aerosol Inhalation of Pharmaceuticals Delivered to Mice Using a Nose-only Exposure System
Published on: April 6, 2017
15:04Modeling and Simulations of Olfactory Drug Delivery with Passive and Active Controls of Nasally Inhaled Pharmaceutical Aerosols
Published on: May 20, 2016
Related Concept Videos
Mechanical Ventilation III: Noninvasive Ventilation
Noninvasive Positive-Pressure Ventilation...
Mechanical Ventilation I: Indication and Settings
Mechanical Ventilation II: Invasive Ventilation
Negative-Pressure Ventilators
Negative-pressure ventilators create a vacuum around the chest or body to draw air into the lungs, simulating breathing. This method does not require an...
Ventilatory Modes
There are three ventilatory modes: full support, partial support, and spontaneous. These are described below.
Full Support Modes
Full support modes include controlled mechanical ventilation, continuous mandatory...
Application of Integration: Problem Solving
Pulmonary Ventilation: Inhalation
Boyle's law becomes particularly pertinent when examining respiratory...