4.7 Article

Development of sucrose stearate-based nanoemulsions and optimisation through γ-cyclodextrin

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpb.2011.01.010

关键词

Lecithin; Sucrose stearate; Nanoemulsion; Cryo TEM; gamma-Cyclodextrin; Fludrocortisone acetate

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nanoemulsions aimed at dermal drug delivery are usually stabilised by natural lecithins. However, lecithin has a high tendency towards self-aggregation and is prone to chemical degradation. Therefore, the aim of this study was to develop nanoemulsions with improved structure and long-term stability by employing a natural sucrose ester mixture as sole surfactant. A thorough comparison between the novel sucrose stearate-based nanoemulsions and corresponding lecithin-based nanoemulsions revealed that the sucrose ester is superior in terms of emulsifying efficiency, droplet formation as well as physical and chemical stability. The novel formulations exhibited a remarkably homogeneous structure in cryo TEM investigations, as opposed to the variable structure observed for lecithin-based systems. The in vitro skin permeation rates of lipophilic drugs from sucrose stearate nanoemulsions were comparable to those obtained with their lecithin-based counterparts. Furthermore, it was observed that addition of gamma-cyclodextrin led to enhanced skin permeation of the steroidal drug fludrocortisone acetate from 9.99 +/- 0.46 to 55.10 +/- 3.67 mu g cm(-2) after 24 h in the case of sucrose stearate-based systems and from 9.98 +/- 0.64 to 98.62 +/- 24.89 mu g cm(-2) after 24 h in the case of lecithin-based systems. This enhancement effect was significantly stronger in formulations based on lecithin (P < 0.05), which indicates that synergistic mechanisms between the surfactant and the cyclodextrin are involved. Cryo TEM images suggest that the cyclodextrin is incorporated into the interfacial film, which might alter drug release rates and improve the droplet microstructure. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.7
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