3.8 Article

Comparative Evaluation of Metformin and Metronidazole Release from Oral Lyophilisates with Different Methods

Journal

SCIENTIA PHARMACEUTICA
Volume 91, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/scipharm91020023

Keywords

orodispersible tablets; oral lyophilisates; interpolyelectrolyte complex; dissolution apparatus; method USP 2; method USP 4; Franz cell

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to compare three different dissolution methods for drug release assessment in oral lyophilisates. Interpolyelectrolyte complexes (IPECs) were prepared using two different polymers and two model drugs. The drug release kinetics were evaluated using artificial saliva and three different set-ups. The results showed that the choice of set-up significantly influenced the drug release profiles.
The aim of this study is to compare three different dissolution methods to assess the drug release from oral lyophilisates, based on interpolyelectrolyte complexes (IPECs). IPECs were prepared by mixing solutions of a linear polymer, Eudragit(& REG;) EPO, with a polymer with a cross-linked structure, Noveon(& REG;) AA-1 or Carbopol(& REG;) 10 Ultrez (in ratios of 1:2 and 1:1, respectively). Metformin or metronidazole were used as model drugs to achieve a systemic or local effect. A comparative assessment of the drug release kinetics was carried out using artificial saliva and three different set-ups: a paddle stirrer (USP apparatus 2), a flow cell (USP apparatus 4) and a Franz diffusion cell. The results demonstrated that oral lyophilisates disintegrated within 1 min. In the case of metformin, the drug release was completed in about 90 min independently of the set-up. The static conditions in the Franz diffusion cell and USP apparatus 2 permitted the aggregation of the IPEC; therefore, the release profiles show a significant difference compared to the USP apparatus 4.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available