Advertisement

AAPS PharmSciTech

, 20:329 | Cite as

Optimizing Aerosolization Using Computational Fluid Dynamics in a Pediatric Air-Jet Dry Powder Inhaler

  • Karl Bass
  • Dale Farkas
  • Worth LongestEmail author
Research Article

Abstract

The objective of this study was to optimize the performance of a high-efficiency pediatric inhaler, referred to as the pediatric air-jet DPI, using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations with supporting experimental analysis of aerosol formation. The pediatric air-jet DPI forms an internal flow pathway consisting of an inlet jet of high-speed air, capsule chamber containing a powder formulation, and outlet orifice. Instead of simulating full breakup of the powder bed to an aerosol in this complex flow system, which is computationally expensive, flow-field-based dispersion parameters were sought that correlated with experimentally determined aerosolization metrics. For the pediatric air-jet DPI configuration that was considered, mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) directly correlated with input turbulent kinetic energy normalized by actuation pressure and flow kinetic energy. Emitted dose (ED) correlated best with input flow rate multiplied by the ratio of capillary diameters. Based on these dispersion parameters, an automated CFD process was used over multiple iterations of over 100 designs to identify optimal inlet and outlet capillary diameters, which affected system performance in complex and unexpected ways. Experimental verification of the optimized designs indicated an MMAD < 1.6 μm and an ED > 90% of loaded dose. While extrathoracic depositional loss will be determined in future studies, at an operating flow rate of 15 L/min, it is expected that pediatric mouth-throat or even nose-throat aerosol deposition fractions will be below 10% and potentially less than 5% representing a significant improvement in the delivery efficiency of dry powder pharmaceutical aerosols to children.

KEY WORDS

active dry powder inhaler small particle aerosol inline dry powder inhaler high-efficiency aerosolization aerosol delivery to children 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Spray dried powder from the VCU Department of Pharmaceutics (Hindle Lab) generated by Serena Bonasera and experimental lab access are gratefully acknowledged. The authors also wish to thank Dr. Hindle for helpful insights and guidance in support of this work.

Funding Information

This study is supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human Development of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01HD087339 and by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01HL139673. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

Virginia Commonwealth University is currently pursuing patent protection of excipient enhanced growth aerosol delivery, DPI aerosol generation devices, and patient interfaces, which if licensed, may provide a future financial interest to the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Coates MS, Fletcher DF, Chan H-K, Raper JA. Effect of design on the performance of a dry powder inhaler using computational fluid dynamics. Part 1: grid structure and mouthpiece length. J Pharm Sci. 2004;93(11):2863–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coates MS, Fletcher DF, Chan H-K, Raper JA. The role of capusle on the performance of a dry powder inhaler using computational and experimental analyses. Pharm Res. 2005;22(6):923–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Coates MS, Chan H-K, Fletcher DF, Raper JA. Influence of air flow on the performance of a dry powder inhaler using computational and experimental analyses. Pharm Res. 2005;22(9):1445–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Coates MS, Chan H-K, Fletcher DF, Raper JA. Effect of design on the performance of a dry powder inhaler using computational fluid dynamics. Part 2: air inlet size. J Pharm Sci. 2006;95(6):1382–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coates MS, Chan H-K, Fletcher DF, Chiou H. Influence of mouthpiece geometry on the aerosol delivery performance of a dry powder inhalation. Pharm Res. 2007;24(8):1450–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shur J, Lee SL, Adams W, Lionberger R, Tibbatts J, Price R. Effect of device design on the in vitro performance and comparability for capsule-based dry powder inhalers. AAPS J. 2012;14(4):667–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Farkas D, Hindle M, Longest PW. Efficient nose-to-lung aerosol delivery with an inline DPI requiring low actuation air volume. Pharm Res. 2018;35(10):194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Longest PW, Farkas D. Development of a new inhaler for high-efficiency dispersion of spray-dried powders using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling. AAPS J. 2018;21:25.  https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-018-0281-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Longest PW, Farkas D, Bass K, Hindle M. Use of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) dispersion parameters in the development of a new DPI actuated with low air volumes. Pharm Res. 2019;36(8).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chen X, Zhong W, Zhou X, Jin B, Sun B. CFD–DEM simulation of particle transport and deposition in pulmonary airway. Powder Technol. 2012;228:309–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tong Z, Zhong W, Yu A, Chan H-K, Yang R. CFD–DEM investigation of the effect of agglomerate–agglomerate collision on dry powder aerosolisation. J Aerosol Sci. 2016;92:109–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yang J, Wu C-Y, Adams M. Three-dimensional DEM–CFD analysis of air-flow-induced detachment of API particles from carrier particles in dry powder inhalers. Acta Pharm Sin B. 2014;4(1):52–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ariane M, Sommerfeld M, Alexiadis A. Wall collision and drug-carrier detachment in dry powder inhalers: using DEM to devise a sub-scale model for CFD calculations. Powder Technol. 2018;334:65–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wong W, Fletcher DF, Traini D, Chan HK, Young PM. The use of computational approaches in inhaler development. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2012;64(4):312–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Matsui H, Grubb BR, Tarran R, Randell SH, Gatzy JT, Davis CW, et al. Evidence for periciliary liquid layer depletion, not abnormal ion composition, in the pathogenesis of cystic fibrosis airways disease. Cell. 1998;95(7):1005–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tarran R, Grubb BR, Parsons D, Picher M, Hirsh AJ, Davis CW, et al. The CF salt controversy: in vivo observations and therapeutic approaches. Mol Cell. 2001;8(1):149–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Stoltz DA, Meyerholz DK, Welsh MJ. Origins of cystic fibrosis lung disease. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(4):351–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Elborn JS. Cystic fibrosis. Lancet. 2016;388(10059):2519–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Smith AL. Inhaled antibiotic therapy: what drug? What dose? What regimen? What formulation? J Cyst Fibros. 2002;1(Suppl 2):189–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ramsey BW, Pepe MS, Quan JM, Otto KL, Montgomery AB, Williams-Warren J, et al. Intermittent administration of inhaled tobramycin in patients with cystic fibrosis. N Engl J Med. 1999;340(1):23–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Farkas D, Hindle M, Bass K, Longest PW. Development of an inline dry powder inhaler for oral or trans-nasal aerosol administration to children. Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery. 2019;In review.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Below A, Bickmann D, Breitkreutz J. Assessing the performance of two dry powder inhalers in preschool children using an idealized pediatric upper airway model. Int J Pharm. 2013;444(1–2):169–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lindert S, Below A, Breitkreutz J. Performance of dry powder inhalers with single dosed capsules in preschool children and adults using improved upper airway models. Pharmaceutics. 2014;6:36–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Laube BL, Sharpless G, Shermer C, Sullivan V, Powell K. Deposition of dry powder generated by solovent in Sophia anatomical infant nose-throat (SAINT) model. Aerosol Sci Technol. 2012;46:514–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Janssens HM, de Jongste JC, Fokkens WJ, Robben SG, Wouters K, Tiddens HA. The Sophia anatomical infant nose-throat (Saint) model: a valuable tool to study aerosol deposition in infants. J Aerosol Med. 2001;14(4):433–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Son Y-J, Longest PW, Hindle M. Aerosolization characteristics of dry powder inhaler formulations for the excipient enhanced growth (EEG) application: effect of spray drying process conditions on aerosol performance. Int J Pharm. 2013;443:137–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Son Y-J, Longest PW, Tian G, Hindle M. Evaluation and modification of commercial dry powder inhalers for the aerosolization of submicrometer excipient enhanced growth (EEG) formulation. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2013;49:390–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    ICRP. Human respiratory tract model for radiological protection. New York: Elsevier Science Ltd; 1994.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Behara SRB, Longest PW, Farkas DR, Hindle M. Development of high efficiency ventilation bag actuated dry powder inhalers. Int J Pharm. 2014;465:52–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bass K, Longest PW. Recommendations for simulating microparticle deposition at conditions similar to the upper airways with two-equation turbulence models. J Aerosol Sci. 2018;119:31–50.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaerosci.2018.02.007.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Longest PW, Holbrook LT. In silico models of aerosol delivery to the respiratory tract - development and applications. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2012;64:296–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Longest PW, Vinchurkar S. Effects of mesh style and grid convergence on particle deposition in bifurcating airway models with comparisons to experimental data. Med Eng Phys. 2007;29(3):350–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Longest PW, Son Y-J, Holbrook LT, Hindle M. Aerodynamic factors responsible for the deaggregation of carrier-free drug powders to form micrometer and submicrometer aerosols. Pharm Res. 2013;30:1608–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Longest PW, Vinchurkar S. Validating CFD predictions of respiratory aerosol deposition: effects of upstream transition and turbulence. J Biomech. 2007;40(2):305–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wilcox DC. Turbulence modeling for CFD. 2nd ed. California: DCW Industries, Inc; 1998.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Longest PW, Hindle M, Das Choudhuri S, Byron PR. Numerical simulations of capillary aerosol generation: CFD model development and comparisons with experimental data. Aerosol Sci Technol. 2007;41(10):952–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Longest PW, Vinchurkar S, Martonen TB. Transport and deposition of respiratory aerosols in models of childhood asthma. J Aerosol Sci. 2006;37:1234–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    White FM. Viscous fluid flow. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1991. xxi, 614 p. pGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bhattacharjee S, Grosshandler W, editors. The formation of a wall jet near a high temperature wall under microgravity environment. ASME 1988 National Heat Transfer Conference, Volume 1; 1988.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Golshahi L, Noga ML, Thompson RB, Finlay WH. In vitro deposition measurement of inhaled micrometer-sized particle in extrathoracic airways of children and adolescents during nose breathing. J Aerosol Sci. 2011;42:474–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Javaheri E, Golshahi L, Finlay W. An idealized geometry that mimics average infant nasal airway deposition. J Aerosol Sci. 2013;55:137–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Storey-Bishoff J, Noga M, Finlay WH. Deposition of micrometer-sized aerosol particles in infant nasal airway replicas. Aerosol Sci. 2008;39:1055–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tavernini S, Church TK, Lewis DA, Noga M, Martin AR, Finlay WH. Deposition of micrometer-sized aerosol particles in neonatal nasal airway replicas. Aerosol Sci Technol. 2018;52(4):407–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical and Nuclear EngineeringVirginia Commonwealth UniversityRichmondUSA
  2. 2.Department of PharmaceuticsVirginia Commonwealth UniversityRichmondUSA

Personalised recommendations