4.4 Article

Experiment on formulation and drug release behavior of porosity asymmetric membrane capsules in vitro

期刊

DRUG DEVELOPMENT AND INDUSTRIAL PHARMACY
卷 38, 期 6, 页码 670-678

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/03639045.2011.611809

关键词

Asymmetric membrane capsule; osmotic pump; Fickian diffusion; controlled release; acetaminophen

资金

  1. Government of China
  2. bureau of Science and Technology Innovation of Wenzhou municipality [S20100042]
  3. bureau of Science and Technology Innovation of Pingyang county [AS201003]
  4. University Science and Technology Innovation of department of education of Zheiang province [2010R413004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Porosity asymmetric membrane capsules were prepared to study the relationship between the capsule formulation and drug release. Cellulose acetate (CA) and pore formers were used in the capsule shell formulation as the main semipermeable membrane material. The capsules were permeable to both water and dissolved solutes. Using sparingly soluble drug acetaminophen as a model, cumulative release was calculated. The slope of the release profile from the distilled water had good relationship with the concentration of the pore formers F68. The release of acetaminophen was independent to the pH, osmotic pressure of dissolution medium, but influenced by intensity of agitation. When the concentration of pore former was low, zero-order release behavior was observed within 24 h which was consistent with Fickian diffusion model. When the concentration of pore former was high, however, Higuchi model release was found which is caused by Fickian diffusion and osmotic pressure release. With scanning electron microscope (SEM), the surface structure and cross-section of the capsule shell were also studied before and after drug delivery. With simple preparation and broad scope of drug application, porosity asymmetric membrane capsules can give desired drug extended release and show more convenience than controlled tablets with laser drilling.

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