Test Data AC7-01: Difference between revisions

From KBwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 92: Line 92:
   
   
The whole exposure of the model to the aerosol was performed in a shielded laboratory
The whole exposure of the model to the aerosol was performed in a shielded laboratory
with an underpressure ventilating system7 which would prevent the aerosol from escaping
with an underpressure ventilating system, which would prevent the aerosol from escaping
the room in case of a primary safety system failure. The laboratory personnel were not
the room in case of a primary safety system failure. The laboratory personnel were not
present in the laboratory during the exposure7 with the exception of the regular instrument
present in the laboratory during the exposure, with the exception of the regular instrument
supervision. Whenever they had to enter the lab7 they wore half mask respirators. The
supervision. Whenever they had to enter the lab, they wore half mask respirators. The
experiments were performed in a steady—state inhalation mode with the flow rates of 157
experiments were performed in a steady—state inhalation mode with the flow rates of 15,
307 and 60 L / min. Liquid monodisperse particles with mass median aerodynamic diameter
30, and 60 L/min. Liquid monodisperse particles with mass median aerodynamic diameter
of 2.5 and 4.3Mm were used. The standard geometric deviation of size was less than 1.24
of 2.5 and 4.3μm were used. The standard geometric deviation of size was less than 1.24
for all measured regimes. The models were exposed for 10 to 15 minutes depending on
for all measured regimes. The models were exposed for 10 to 15 minutes depending on
radioactivity decrease by radionuclide decay. The peak activity in the models was 4 to 60
radioactivity decrease by radionuclide decay. The peak activity in the models was 4 to 60
Bq/cm2 (depending on the particle size and concentration7 measuring mode7 and model
Bq/cm<sup>2</sup> (depending on the particle size and concentration, measuring mode, and model
used)7 as measured with an RP—2000 portable contamination meter (VF Zilina7 CZ).
used), as measured with an RP-2000 portable contamination meter (VF Zilina, CZ).


2.3 Deposited activity evaluation method
==Deposited activity evaluation method==
 
The model was transported to a Siemens Biograph 64 Truepoint PET-CT scanner
immediately after the radioactive exposure. The transportation took approximately 3 minutes.
The PET-CT scanner acquired firstly CT images, which were promptly followed by PET


The model was transported to a Siemens Biograph 64 Truepoint PET—CT scanner imme—
diately after the radioactive exposure. The transportation took approximately 3 minutes.
The PET—CT scanner acquired firstly CT images7 which were promptly followed by PET


11


   
   

Revision as of 16:34, 3 October 2019

Front Page

Description

Test Data

CFD Simulations

Evaluation

Best Practice Advice

Aerosol deposition in the human upper airways

Application Challenge AC7-01   © copyright ERCOFTAC 2019

Test Data

Overview of Tests

Major portions of this section were adopted from Lizal et al. (2015). The positron emission tomography (PET) method provides the best spatial resolution (among radiological methods). In addition to local deposition in the various sections, the deposition hot spots can also be evaluated. However, in comparison to the PET methodology, which is routinely applied to clinical examination, using this method in the in vitro design requires major modifications both in the aerosol preparation and, in particular, in the experiment evaluation approach. The method, based on PET and fulfilling the above mentioned criteria, is presented in the following.

The aerosol exposure procedure

It is a common practice to coat the inner surface of the model, especially when using solid particles, to prevent bouncing of the particles hitting the surface. Since we used liquid di-ethylhexyl sebacate (DEHS) particles, we did not need to coat the inner surface of the model. Another reason for the coating is to prevent surface wetting. In our case the exposure time was short (5 to 15 mins) and only small amounts of DEHS deposited on the walls, therefore the possible flooding of the surface was not an issue. Aerosol particles were generated by a TSI 3475 Condensation Monodisperse Aerosol Generator (CMAG) from TSI, Inc., which works on the controlled heterogeneous condensation principle. Vapours of a suitable material, specifically DEHS, condense by a controlled method on small sodium chloride particles serving as the condensation nuclei. The advantage of DEHS is that it is not hydrophilic and does not evaporate, resulting in a constant size of generated particles. In a standard operating mode, the generator can produce particles with aerodynamic diameters within the 0.1 to 8μm range. The density of DEHS used for the experiments was 0.914 g/cm3 at 25°C. Radioactive aerosol particles were needed for the PET measurement of deposition. Therefore, the solution in the atomizer of the generator had to be tagged by a suitable radioactive substance. Fluorine 18 was the logical Choice of the positron emitter, being easily available at the cooperating PET center and possessing a suitable half-life (109 minutes). A solution of fluorine 18 in the form of fluoride ions was prepared by irradiation of H2180 enriched water on an IBA Cyclone 18/9 cyclotron (irradiation time 25 min, integrated irradiation current 11 μAh) at the UJV Rez's PET Centre in Brno. The irradiated water was transferred by a capillary transport system to a shielded dispensing box, where the fluorine 18 ions were captured on an ion—exchange resin (AG1—X8, BioRad) column and subsequently eluted with 300 ml of 10% sodium Chloride solution, followed by 1Â ml of water for injection. The resulting solution was repeatedly diluted with water for injection until the desired initial radioactivity was achieved. The CMAG was modified for the deposition measurement by using PET so that the atomizer vessel was accommodated in a protective lead container to shield of ionizing radiation. The atomizer was filled with a sodium Chloride solution containing 18F at an initial activity of 2.5 GBq. The concentration of sodium Chloride solution was 20 mg/L. The experimental rig is shown in Figure 5.


AC7-01 fig5.png
Figure 5: A scheme of the experimental setup during the PET measurement of aerosol deposition.


The generated aerosol was fed through a 85Kr based NEKR,—10 charge equilibrator (Eckert & Ziegler Cesio) to a PAM aerosol monitor (TSI 3375) for continuous particle size and concentration measurement. The operation and precision of the aerosol monitor was validated using Aerodynamic particle sizer (APS) TSI 3321. The validation was performed prior to the experiment using the identical setup, apart from adding of the radioactive substance into the atomizer. The size of the particles generated by CMAG was adjusted according to APS and the size displayed by the aerosol monitor was recorded. Subsequently, during the experiment, only the radioactive substance was added to the atomizer and particles of the same size were produced. Usually only a small correction of saturator flow was needed at the beginning of the experiments. Only one size of particles was measured during one day; therefore no further adjustments of the generator were needed. The aerosol monitor served as an on-line indication of the process of aerosol generation being stable. It was easily accomplished, as the exposure of the model to the aerosol lasted only 5 to 15 mins. Filters consisting of Millipore AP40 glass fibers were attached to the output branches of the respiratory tract model. The entire system (Figure 6) was enclosed in a plastic bag which was kept in a vacuum to prevent the active aerosol from leaking into the laboratory. All the 10 terminal branches with flow meters for flow rate control were combined into one branch with a protective High efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter. The vacuum was generated with a Busch R, 5 PA 0008 C rotary oil vacuum pump. The flow distribution in each section of the model is provided in Table 3.


AC7-01 fig6.png
Figure 6: A photograph of the physical model prior to the PET measurement.


The whole exposure of the model to the aerosol was performed in a shielded laboratory with an underpressure ventilating system, which would prevent the aerosol from escaping the room in case of a primary safety system failure. The laboratory personnel were not present in the laboratory during the exposure, with the exception of the regular instrument supervision. Whenever they had to enter the lab, they wore half mask respirators. The experiments were performed in a steady—state inhalation mode with the flow rates of 15, 30, and 60 L/min. Liquid monodisperse particles with mass median aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 and 4.3μm were used. The standard geometric deviation of size was less than 1.24 for all measured regimes. The models were exposed for 10 to 15 minutes depending on radioactivity decrease by radionuclide decay. The peak activity in the models was 4 to 60 Bq/cm2 (depending on the particle size and concentration, measuring mode, and model used), as measured with an RP-2000 portable contamination meter (VF Zilina, CZ).

Deposited activity evaluation method

The model was transported to a Siemens Biograph 64 Truepoint PET-CT scanner immediately after the radioactive exposure. The transportation took approximately 3 minutes. The PET-CT scanner acquired firstly CT images, which were promptly followed by PET







Contributed by: *** — ***

Front Page

Description

Test Data

CFD Simulations

Evaluation

Best Practice Advice


© copyright ERCOFTAC 2019