4.5 Article

Efficacy of Poly-Lactic-Co-Glycolic Acid Micro- and Nanoparticles of Ciprofloxacin Against Bacterial Biofilms

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES
卷 105, 期 10, 页码 3115-3122

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.xphs.2016.06.022

关键词

polymeric drug carrier; controlled release; nanoparticles; microparticles; encapsulation; drug resistance; poly(lactic/glycolic) acid (PLGA or PLA)

资金

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council [GNT1090898]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Bacterial biofilms are associated with a number of recurring infectious diseases and are a major cause for antibiotic resistance. Despite the broad use of polymeric microparticles and nanoparticles in biomedical research, it is not clear which particle size is more effective against biofilms. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of sustained release poly-lactic-co-glycolic acid (PLGA) micro- and nanoparticles containing ciprofloxacin against biofilms of Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The PLGA particles were prepared by the double emulsion solvent evaporation method. The resulting microparticles (12 mm) and nanoparticles (300 nm) contained drug loads of 7.3% and 4.5% (wt/wt) ciprofloxacin, respectively. Drug release was complete within 1 week following comparable release profiles for both particle sizes. Micro-and nanoparticles demonstrated a similar in vitro antibiofilm performance against mature P aeruginosa and S aureus with marked differences between the 2 strains. The sustained release of ciprofloxacin from micro-and nanoparticles over 6 days was equally effective as the continuous treatment with ciprofloxacin solution over the same period resulting in the eradication of culturable S aureus suggesting that reformulation of ciprofloxacin as sustained release PLGA micro-and nanoparticles might be valuable formulation approaches for the treatment of biofilms. (C) 2016 American Pharmacists Association (R). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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