HSUANLING HSIAO

Ms. HSUANLING HSIAO

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

3Years (2024-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
19 November 2024 in Antibiotics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CHChung-Chi Huang
Chung-Chi Huang
TFTien-Pei Fang
Tien-Pei Fang
CLChieh-Mo Lin
Chieh-Mo Lin
CMChu Chien Ming
Chu Chien Ming
HHHSUANLING HSIAO
HSUANLING HSIAO
HLHui-Ling Lin
Hui-Ling Lin
Backgroud: This prospective randomized trial evaluated the clinical efficacy of inhaled colistin administered through two distinct nebulizer types, a vibrating mesh nebulizer (VMN) and a jet nebulizer (JN), in the treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by multidrug-resistant bacteria. In addition, an in vitro model was used to determine the optimal delivery of colistin. Method: Thirty-two patients prescribed intravenous (IV) colistin inhalation were randomized to receive either a VMN (n = 17) or a JN (n = 15), then compared to the control group (IV alone) over a 7-to 10-day period. The primary endpoint was the clinical pulmonary infection score (CPIS), and the secondary endpoints were the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACE) score, and duration of ventilator use. Results: Results from in vitro testing demonstrated that VMN delivered a significantly higher colistin dose than JN (35.68 ± 3.55% vs. 23.56 ± 3.31%; p < 0.001) when positioned at the humidifier inlet. Compared to the IV alone group, the IV with inhalation group yielded significant improvements in CPIS, SOFA score, and APACHE score on day 7; nevertheless, clinical outcomes between the two nebulizers were statistically indistinguishable. Conclusions: In conclusion, although VMN delivers a higher dose in vitro, both nebulizers yielded comparable clinical outcomes. This study was registered at US Clinical Trial Registration (NCT04633317).