Comparison of the Application of Vibrating Mesh Nebulizer and Jet Nebulizer in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis

IF 2.8 3区医学 Q1 Medicine

International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Pub Date : 2024-03-28 DOI:10.2147/copd.s452191

Zhouzhou Feng, Zhengcai Han, Yaqin Wang, Hong Guo, Jian Liu

{"title":"Comparison of the Application of Vibrating Mesh Nebulizer and Jet Nebulizer in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis","authors":"Zhouzhou Feng, Zhengcai Han, Yaqin Wang, Hong Guo, Jian Liu","doi":"10.2147/copd.s452191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To comparison of the application of Vibrating Mesh Nebulizer and Jet Nebulizer in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Research Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statements. The primary outcome measures analyzed included: The amount of inhaler in the urine sample at 30 minutes after inhalation therapy (USAL0.5), The total amount of inhaler in urine sample within 24 hours (USAL24), Aerosol emitted, Forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), Forced vital capacity (FVC). Results: Ten studies were included with a total of 314 study participants, including 157 subjects in the VMN group and 157 subjects in the JN group. The data analysis results of USAL0.5, MD (1.88 [95% CI, 0.95 to 2.81], P = 0.000), showed a statistically significant difference. USAL24, MD (1.61 [95% CI, 1.14 to 2.09], P = 0.000), showed a statistically significant difference. The results of aerosol emitted showed a statistically significant difference in MD (3.44 [95% CI, 2.84 to 4.04], P = 0.000). The results of FEV1 showed MD (0.05 [95% CI, − 0.24 to 0.35], P=0.716), the results were not statistically significant. The results of FVC showed MD (0.11 [95% CI, − 0.18 to 0.41], P=0.459), the results were not statistically significant. It suggests that VMN is better than JN and provides higher aerosols, but there is no difference in improving lung function between them. Conclusion: VMN is significantly better than JN in terms of drug delivery and utilization in the treatment of patients with COPD. However, in the future use of nebulizers, it is important to select a matching nebulizer based on a combination of factors such as mechanism of action of the nebulizer, disease type and comorbidities, ventilation strategies and modes, drug formulations, as well as cost-effectiveness, in order to achieve the ideal treatment of COPD. Keywords: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, aerosol, vibrating mesh nebulizers, jet nebulizers, meta-analysis ","PeriodicalId":13792,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/copd.s452191","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To comparison of the application of Vibrating Mesh Nebulizer and Jet Nebulizer in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
Research Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statements. The primary outcome measures analyzed included: The amount of inhaler in the urine sample at 30 minutes after inhalation therapy (USAL0.5), The total amount of inhaler in urine sample within 24 hours (USAL24), Aerosol emitted, Forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV₁), Forced vital capacity (FVC).
Results: Ten studies were included with a total of 314 study participants, including 157 subjects in the VMN group and 157 subjects in the JN group. The data analysis results of USAL0.5, MD (1.88 [95% CI, 0.95 to 2.81], P = 0.000), showed a statistically significant difference. USAL24, MD (1.61 [95% CI, 1.14 to 2.09], P = 0.000), showed a statistically significant difference. The results of aerosol emitted showed a statistically significant difference in MD (3.44 [95% CI, 2.84 to 4.04], P = 0.000). The results of FEV₁ showed MD (0.05 [95% CI, − 0.24 to 0.35], P=0.716), the results were not statistically significant. The results of FVC showed MD (0.11 [95% CI, − 0.18 to 0.41], P=0.459), the results were not statistically significant. It suggests that VMN is better than JN and provides higher aerosols, but there is no difference in improving lung function between them.
Conclusion: VMN is significantly better than JN in terms of drug delivery and utilization in the treatment of patients with COPD. However, in the future use of nebulizers, it is important to select a matching nebulizer based on a combination of factors such as mechanism of action of the nebulizer, disease type and comorbidities, ventilation strategies and modes, drug formulations, as well as cost-effectiveness, in order to achieve the ideal treatment of COPD.

Keywords: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, aerosol, vibrating mesh nebulizers, jet nebulizers, meta-analysis

查看原文本刊更多论文

振动网雾化器和喷射雾化器在慢性阻塞性肺病中的应用比较：系统回顾与元分析

目的：比较振动网雾化器和喷射雾化器在慢性阻塞性肺病（COPD）中的应用：比较振动网雾化器和喷射雾化器在慢性阻塞性肺病（COPD）中的应用：本系统综述和荟萃分析按照系统综述和荟萃分析首选报告项目（PRISMA）声明进行。分析的主要结果指标包括吸入治疗后 30 分钟尿样中的吸入剂含量（USAL0.5）、24 小时内尿样中的吸入剂总量（USAL24）、气溶胶释放量、1 秒内用力呼气容积（FEV1）、用力肺活量（FVC）：结果：共纳入了 10 项研究，共有 314 人参与研究，其中 VMN 组 157 人，JN 组 157 人。USAL0.5、MD（1.88 [95% CI，0.95 至 2.81]，P = 0.000）的数据分析结果显示差异有统计学意义。USAL24, MD (1.61 [95% CI, 1.14 to 2.09], P = 0.000)，差异有统计学意义。气溶胶释放量结果显示，MD（3.44 [95% CI，2.84 至 4.04]，P = 0.000）差异有统计学意义。FEV1 结果显示 MD（0.05 [95% CI, - 0.24 to 0.35]，P=0.716），结果无统计学意义。FVC 结果显示 MD（0.11 [95% CI, - 0.18 to 0.41]，P=0.459），结果无统计学意义。这表明 VMN 比 JN 更好，能提供更高的气溶胶，但两者在改善肺功能方面没有差异：结论：在治疗慢性阻塞性肺病患者时，VMN 在药物输送和利用方面明显优于 JN。然而，在今后的雾化器使用中，必须根据雾化器的作用机制、疾病类型和合并症、通气策略和模式、药物配方以及成本效益等综合因素选择匹配的雾化器，以达到理想的慢性阻塞性肺疾病治疗效果。关键词：慢性阻塞性肺疾病；气溶胶；振网式雾化器；喷射式雾化器；荟萃分析

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-

CiteScore

5.10

自引率

10.70%

发文量

372

审稿时长

16 weeks

期刊介绍： An international, peer-reviewed journal of therapeutics and pharmacology focusing on concise rapid reporting of clinical studies and reviews in COPD. Special focus will be given to the pathophysiological processes underlying the disease, intervention programs, patient focused education, and self management protocols. This journal is directed at specialists and healthcare professionals

文献相关原料

公司名称	产品信息	采购帮参考价格