| Literature DB >> 21383856 |
Hf Salem1, Me Abdelrahim, K Abo Eid, Ma Sharaf.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nanosized dry powder inhalers provide higher stability for poorly water-soluble drugs as compared with liquid formulations. However, the respirable particles must have a diameter of 1-5 μm in order to deposit in the lungs. Controlled agglomeration of the nanoparticles increases their geometric particle size so they can deposit easily in the lungs. In the lungs, they fall apart to reform nanoparticles, thus enhancing the dissolution rate of the drugs. Theophylline is a bronchodilator with poor solubility in water.Entities:
Keywords: agglomerates; dry powder inhaler; nanoparticles; theophylline
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21383856 PMCID: PMC3044184 DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S14309
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Nanomedicine ISSN: 1176-9114
The recovery, particle size, and polydispersity indices of theophylline nanoparticles and theophylline agglomerates
| Nanoparticles | 5 | 47 ± 07 | 470 ± 20 | 0.65 ± 0.14 |
| 10 | 70 ± 18 | 290 ± 22 | 0.21 ± 0.02 | |
| Agglomerates | 5 | 66 ± 19 | 880 ± 180 | 0.55 ± 0.11 |
| 10 | 90 ± 03 | 2470 ± 120 | 0.67 ± 0.16 |
Abbreviation: PI, polydispersity index.
Figure 1Nanoparticles (A), close up of theophylline nanoparticles (B), theophylline controlled agglomerates (C), close up of theophylline controlled agglomerates (D), aggregation of theophylline nanoparticles upon using high concentration of NaCl (E), and theophylline powder without processing (F). Note the circles that showing the mechanism of self-assembly of nanorods on a copper grid. The arrows show fluffy spherical nanorods of the controlled agglomerates.
The differences in zeta potential between nanoparticles and agglomerates at different pH ranges upon addition of diluted NaCl (0.5 mL, 10−3M) solution (n = 3)
| 3 | –7.7 ± 0.5 | –11.1 ± 1.2 |
| 5.5 | –37.9 ± 2 | –24.9 ± 2.1 |
| 7.4 | –39.5 ± 0.7 | –28.9 ± 0.7 |
Flowability parameters of theophylline powder, theophylline nanoparticles, and nanorose agglomerates
| Powder | 0.80 ± 0.3 | 1.40 ± 0.2 | 33 ± 2 | 1.5 | 65 ± 2 |
| Nanoparticles | 0.20 ± 0.02 | 0.29 ± 0.01 | 31 ± 6 | 1.45 | 80 ± 1 |
| Agglomerate | 0.04 ± 0.01 | 0.05 ± 0.03 | 25 ± 2 | 1.25 | 70 ± 2 |
Figure 2Differential scanning calorimetry thermograms for stearic acid, theophylline, theophylline nanoparticles, and theophylline agglomerates.
Differential scanning calorimetry peak integrations for theophylline powder, stearic acid powder, theophylline nanoparticles, and theophylline agglomerates in the lyophilized form
| Theophylline | 274.0 | 188 |
| Stearic | 60.0 | 387 |
| Nanosuspension | ||
| Theophylline peak | 272.9 | 53.08 |
| Stearic peak | 55.6 | 2.83 |
| Theophylline agglomerate | ||
| Theophylline peak | 273.39 | 118 |
| Stearic peak | 70.01 | 843.43 |
Figure 3Cumulative drug released against time for the theophylline powder, theophylline nanoparticles, and theophylline agglomerates (n = 3 ± standard deviation).
The aerodynamic characteristics of theophylline, theophylline nanoparticles, and theophylline agglomerates
| Total emitted dose (μg) | 59.9 ± 8.5 | 70.6 ± 6.7 | 72.3 ± 7.5 |
| Total emitted dose (% of nominal dose) | 75.5 ± 11.4 | 88.3 ± 9.4 | 90.4 ± 10.3 |
| Fine particle dose (μg) | 33.3 ± 12.2 | 55.4 ± 7.8 | 57.4 ± 6.7 |
| Fine particle fraction (% of emitted dose) | 55.6 ± 6.4 | 81.9 ± 4.3 | 79.4 ± 4.6 |
| Mass median aerodynamic diameter (μm) | 4.4 ± 1.2 | 2.5 ± 1.1 | 2.3 ± 0.9 |
| Geometric standard deviation | 2.2 ± 0.5 | 1.6 ± 0.4 | 1.4 ± 0.3 |