通过振动网和喷射雾化技术向呼吸道输送鼠李糖乳杆菌 GG

IF 4.9 3区 医学 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Alex Seungyeon Byun, Luis Vitetta, Hak-Kim Chan, Philip Chi Lip Kwok
{"title":"通过振动网和喷射雾化技术向呼吸道输送鼠李糖乳杆菌 GG","authors":"Alex Seungyeon Byun, Luis Vitetta, Hak-Kim Chan, Philip Chi Lip Kwok","doi":"10.3390/pharmaceutics16101326","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of probiotic bacteria to improve lung health has been gaining interest. Although the oral delivery of probiotics and their effects are well documented, there is currently limited knowledge on the respiratory delivery of probiotics.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to investigate whether nebulisation is suitable for delivering <i>Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus</i> GG (LGG) into the lungs for the potential treatment of bacterial pulmonary infections.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>It compared the dose output and aerosol performance of a vibrating-mesh nebuliser (VMN) and a jet nebuliser (JN) in nebulising LGG suspended in de Man Rogosa Sharpe (MRS) broth, phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), or normal saline (0.9% <i>w</i>/<i>v</i> sodium chloride in water).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The VMN consistently produced a higher output than the JN for all liquid media, indicating that VMN was more efficient. The fine-particle fractions of both nebulisers were comparable for a given medium. The highest fine-particle fraction was achieved with LGG suspended in MRS broth for both nebulisers (20.5 ± 2.8% for VMN; 18.7 ± 3.4% for JN). This suggests that the aerosol performance of nebulised probiotics may depend on the medium in which the probiotic bacteria were suspended.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Therefore, this study demonstrated that the nebulisation efficiency of LGG depended on the nebuliser type and liquid medium of the probiotic suspension.</p>","PeriodicalId":19894,"journal":{"name":"Pharmaceutics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11510752/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Respiratory Delivery of <i>Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus</i> GG by Vibrating-Mesh and Jet Nebulisation.\",\"authors\":\"Alex Seungyeon Byun, Luis Vitetta, Hak-Kim Chan, Philip Chi Lip Kwok\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/pharmaceutics16101326\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The use of probiotic bacteria to improve lung health has been gaining interest. Although the oral delivery of probiotics and their effects are well documented, there is currently limited knowledge on the respiratory delivery of probiotics.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to investigate whether nebulisation is suitable for delivering <i>Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus</i> GG (LGG) into the lungs for the potential treatment of bacterial pulmonary infections.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>It compared the dose output and aerosol performance of a vibrating-mesh nebuliser (VMN) and a jet nebuliser (JN) in nebulising LGG suspended in de Man Rogosa Sharpe (MRS) broth, phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), or normal saline (0.9% <i>w</i>/<i>v</i> sodium chloride in water).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The VMN consistently produced a higher output than the JN for all liquid media, indicating that VMN was more efficient. The fine-particle fractions of both nebulisers were comparable for a given medium. The highest fine-particle fraction was achieved with LGG suspended in MRS broth for both nebulisers (20.5 ± 2.8% for VMN; 18.7 ± 3.4% for JN). This suggests that the aerosol performance of nebulised probiotics may depend on the medium in which the probiotic bacteria were suspended.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Therefore, this study demonstrated that the nebulisation efficiency of LGG depended on the nebuliser type and liquid medium of the probiotic suspension.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19894,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmaceutics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11510752/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmaceutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics16101326\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmaceutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics16101326","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:使用益生菌改善肺部健康的研究越来越受到关注。虽然益生菌的口服给药及其效果已被充分记录,但目前有关益生菌呼吸道给药的知识还很有限:本研究旨在探讨雾化吸入是否适合将鼠李糖乳杆菌 GG(LGG)送入肺部,以治疗肺部细菌感染:方法:比较了振动网雾化器(VMN)和喷射雾化器(JN)在雾化悬浮于德曼-罗戈萨-夏普(MRS)肉汤、磷酸盐缓冲盐水(PBS)或生理盐水(0.9% w/v 氯化钠水溶液)中的 LGG 时的剂量输出和气溶胶性能:在所有液体培养基中,VMN 的产量始终高于 JN,这表明 VMN 的效率更高。对于给定介质,两种雾化器的细颗粒分数相当。对于悬浮在 MRS 肉汤中的 LGG,两种雾化器的细颗粒分数都最高(VMN 为 20.5 ± 2.8%;JN 为 18.7 ± 3.4%)。这表明,雾化益生菌的气溶胶性能可能取决于悬浮益生菌的培养基:因此,这项研究表明,LGG 的雾化效率取决于雾化器类型和益生菌悬浮液的液体培养基。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Respiratory Delivery of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG by Vibrating-Mesh and Jet Nebulisation.

Background: The use of probiotic bacteria to improve lung health has been gaining interest. Although the oral delivery of probiotics and their effects are well documented, there is currently limited knowledge on the respiratory delivery of probiotics.

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate whether nebulisation is suitable for delivering Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) into the lungs for the potential treatment of bacterial pulmonary infections.

Methods: It compared the dose output and aerosol performance of a vibrating-mesh nebuliser (VMN) and a jet nebuliser (JN) in nebulising LGG suspended in de Man Rogosa Sharpe (MRS) broth, phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), or normal saline (0.9% w/v sodium chloride in water).

Results: The VMN consistently produced a higher output than the JN for all liquid media, indicating that VMN was more efficient. The fine-particle fractions of both nebulisers were comparable for a given medium. The highest fine-particle fraction was achieved with LGG suspended in MRS broth for both nebulisers (20.5 ± 2.8% for VMN; 18.7 ± 3.4% for JN). This suggests that the aerosol performance of nebulised probiotics may depend on the medium in which the probiotic bacteria were suspended.

Conclusions: Therefore, this study demonstrated that the nebulisation efficiency of LGG depended on the nebuliser type and liquid medium of the probiotic suspension.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pharmaceutics
Pharmaceutics Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmaceutical Science
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
2379
审稿时长
16.41 days
期刊介绍: Pharmaceutics (ISSN 1999-4923) is an open access journal which provides an advanced forum for the science and technology of pharmaceutics and biopharmaceutics. It publishes reviews, regular research papers, communications,  and short notes. Covered topics include pharmacokinetics, toxicokinetics, pharmacodynamics, pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics, and pharmaceutical formulation. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical details in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信