4.4 Article

Effect of particle size and surface charge of nanoparticles in penetration through intestinal mucus barrier

期刊

JOURNAL OF NANOPARTICLE RESEARCH
卷 22, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11051-020-04785-y

关键词

Fluorescent nanoparticles; Particle size; Surface charge; Mucus penetration; Confocal laser scanning microscopy; Nanobiomedicine

资金

  1. Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB), Department of Science and Technology, India [EMR/2016/005421]
  2. Department of Science and Technology, India

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mucus is a semipermeable membrane that acts as a barrier for the transport of nanoparticles delivered through the oral route. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of particle size and surface charge on the penetration of nanoparticles through the intestinal mucus barrier. Polystyrene fluorescent nanoparticles of varying particle sizes, including 50, 100, 200, 500, 750, 1000 nm, were utilized to study the effect of particle size on mucus penetration. Also, nanoparticles with amino and carboxylate/sulfate surface functional groups were utilized to study the effect of surface charge. A 24-well plate with transwell insert containing rabbit intestinal mucus was modeled as a diffusion cell setup to perform nanoparticle permeation studies. Results showed that particles with 50 nm diameter permeated to a significantly (p < 0.05) greater extent across mucus compared with particles of >= 200 nm size. Confocal laser scanning microscopic images showed the accumulation of particles of >= 200 nm within mucus with the progression of incubation time. In the case of particles with different surface functional groups, mucus permeation was found to be significantly (p < 0.05) greater for neutral and sulfate group particles compared with particles of amino surface. In conclusion, the most desirable particle size and surface charge for nanoparticle mucus penetration were found to be 50 nm and neutral, respectively. Graphical abstract

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据