患者疗效。

追求更佳。

了解如何更好地提供吸入治疗,从而影响呼吸系统患者的疗效。1-7

1000 万名患者。

急诊气雾剂给药领域的世界领导者9

Our 我们独一无二的振动网技术产生的液滴大小稳定,从而实现最佳肺部沉积8。与喷射式雾化器相比4,10,11它可将多达六倍的药物输送到肺部1为患者带来带来更好的治疗效果。 受到全球领先的机械通气公司的信赖和认可,并获得 300 多项已批准和正在申请中的国际专利支持。8

Aerogen in 75 Countries

急性呼吸道疾病加重的患者。

快速有效的治疗

快速有效的治疗 与传统的喷射式雾化相比,Aerogen Ultra 和Aerogen Solo 可在更短的时间内提供更多的药物,从而更快地改善患者的反应。 10,11,12

事实证明,与传统的喷射式雾化相比,Aerogen Ultra 减少了控制症状所需的治疗次数4,10提高了出院率并降低了入院率。4,10,19 

与传统的喷气雾化相比,Aerogen 可以提供:

输送更多药物

在慢性阻塞性肺病 (COPD) 模型中,在近一半的时间内可将更多吸入性药物送入肺部。12

更快控制症状。

85% 的患者在服用一次 2.5 mg 的沙丁胺醇后症状得到了控制。10

减少住院时间

在 ED 的住院时间缩短 37 分钟(中位数)。10

机械通气患者

安全有效,值得信赖。

解决安全问题

Aerogen 是唯一的闭路气雾剂给药系统,能减少雾化治疗时患者产生的传染性气雾剂扩散并提供有效的治疗。1,2

提高效率

Aerogen 有效提供吸入药物。2,3,4 与喷射雾化器15相比,向肺部14输送的药物增加了五倍。与加压式计量吸入器 (pMDI) 相比,Aerogen 在成人机械通气模型中的吸入质量更高。16

值得信赖

许多世界领先的机械通气公司都推荐使用 Aerogen,包括 Dräger、GE、Hamilton Medical、Maquet、Medtronic 和 Philips。

呼吸系统疾病患者

经证明能有效治疗呼吸系统疾病患者

多项临床研究表明,与传统的喷射雾化器相比6,7,11,19Aerogen 改善了儿童和成人患者的临床效果,降低了入院率4,10 并且能够更好更快地缓解症状4 和支气管扩张反应。4,5,10

输送更多药物

与喷射雾化器相比,通过无创通气 (NIV) 和高流量鼻导管 (HFNC) 输送到肺部的药物量几乎增加了四倍。16,17,18

用途广泛,易于使用。

为了满足患者多元化的吸入治疗需求,Aerogen Solo 可轻松集成到多个呼吸系统中。9,14,21 作为单一患者使用型雾化器,Aerogen Solo 可供各种疗法使用长达 28 天916,17,18

儿科哮喘患者

减少治疗、加快出院、减少入院、改善疗效。

减少治疗、加快出院、减少入院、改善疗效。 与喷射雾化器相比,为接受急诊治疗的儿科患者带来的好处包括减少治疗、加快出院、改善疗效、降低入院率。4,19

在通气过程中,治疗的控制和稳定性是至关重要的,Aerogen Solo 能保持一个封闭的通气回路,回路上方配备有药物储液器,并且该储液器与患者回路是隔离开来的。9这样一来,便可实现不破坏回路的前提下输送吸入药物,并降低了污染液体的雾化9,13和相关的肺功能衰竭风险。22


取得联系。

安排与我们的临床专家通话,讨论如何为您的患者带来更好的结果。

联系我们。

参考文献。

1. Dugernier J, Hesse M, Vanbever R, et al. SPECT-CT comparison of lung deposition using a system combining a vibrating-mesh nebulizer with a valved holding chamber and a conventional jet nebulizer: a randomized cross-over study. Pharm Res 20;34:290–300.
2. Reminiac F, Vecellio L, Mac Loughlin R, et al. Nasal high flow nebulization in infants and toddlers: an in vitro and in vivo scintigraphic study. Pediatr Pulmonol 2017;52:337–344
3. Galindo-Filho VC, Ramos ME, Rattes CS, et al. Radioaerosol pulmonary deposition using mesh and jet nebulizers during noninvasive ventilation in healthy subjects. Respir Care 2015;60(9):1238–1246
4. Moody GB, Luckett PM, Shockley CM, et al. Clinical efficacy of vibrating mesh and jet nebulizers with different interfaces in pediatric subjects with asthma. Respir Care 2020;65(10):1451–1463.
5. Reminiac F, Vecellio L, Bodet-Contentin L, et al. Nasal high-flow bronchodilator nebulization: a randomized cross-over study. Ann Intensive Care 2018;8:128.6. Cushen B, Alsaid A, Abdulkareem A, et al. A pilot study to assess bronchodilator response during an acute exacerbation of COPD using a vibrating mesh nebuliser versus jet nebuliser for bronchodilator delivery. Thorax 2016;71:A251.7. Avdeev S, Nuralieva G, Soe AK, et al. Comparison of response to aerosol drug delivery with mesh and jet nebulizers during non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in acute exacerbation of COPD. Eur Respir J 2017;50:PA1894.8. 档案数据9. Aerogen Instruction Manual
10. Dunne RB, Shortt S. Comparison of bronchodilator administration with vibrating mesh nebulizer and standard jet nebulizer in the emergency department. Am J Emerg Med 2018; 4: 641–646.11. Chweich H, Idrees N, Rice L, et al. Effectiveness of a vibrating mesh aerosolizer compared to a jet nebulizer for the delivery of bronchodilator therapy to acute adult asthmatics in the emergency department a randomized controlled trial. A2209–A2209. ATS poster presentation, 2019.
12.  Hickin S, Mac Loughlin R, Sweeney L, et al. Comparison of mesh nebuliser versus jet nebuliser in simulated adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Poster Coll Emerg Med Clin Excell Conf, 2014.

13. Ari A. Practical strategies for a safe and effective delivery of aerosolized medications to patients with COVID-19. In Respiratory Medicine 2020 (Vol. 167)
14. Dugernier J, Reychler G, Wittebole X, et al. Aerosol delivery with two ventilation modes during mechanical ventilation: a randomized study. Ann Intensive Care 2016;6(1):73
15. MacIntyre NR, Silver RM, Miller CW, et al. Aerosol delivery in intubated, mechanically ventilated patients. Crit Care Med 1985;13(2):81–84.
16. Ari A, Atalay OT, Harwood R, et al. Influence of nebulizer type, position, and bias flow on aerosol drug delivery in simulated pediatric and adult lung models during mechanical ventilation. Respir Care 2010;55:845–851.
17. Galindo-Filho VC, Alcoforado L, Rattes C, et al. A mesh nebulizer is more effective than jet nebulizer to nebulize bronchodilators during non-invasive ventilation of subjects with COPD: A randomized controlled trial with radiolabeled aerosols. Respir Med 2019;153:60–67.
18. Dugernier J, Hesse M, Jumetz T, et al. Aerosol delivery with two nebulizers through high-flow nasal cannula: a randomized cross-over single-photon emission computed tomography-computed tomography study. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv 2017;30:349–358.
19. Cantu T, Jenkins L. Quality Improvement project to compare vibrating mesh nebulizer therapy with hour long jet nebulizer therapy for albuterol delivery in asthma and reactive airway disorder patients in a pediatric emergency department. Respir Care. 2019;6
20. Fink, JB Ehrmann, Li E, et al. Reducing aerosol-related risk of transmission in the era of COVID-19: an interim guidance endorsed by the International Society of Aerosols in Medicine. J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv.2020;33.
21. Ari A. An Evaluation of nebulizers for better clinical outcomes. Eurasian J Pulmonol 2014;16:1–7.
22. Dugernier J, Ehrmann S, Sottiaux T, et al. Aerosol delivery during invasive mechanical ventilation: A systematic review. Crit Care 2017;21.