| Literature DB >> 21936893 |
Tin-Hinan Kabri1, Elmira Arab-Tehrany, Nabila Belhaj, Michel Linder.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nano-emulsions, as non-equilibrium systems, present characteristics and properties which depend not only on composition but also on their method of preparation. To obtain better penetration, nanocosmeceuticals use nano-sized systems for the delivery of active ingredients to targeted cells. In this work, nano-emulsions composed of miglyol, rapeseed oil and salmon oil were developed as a cosmetic matrix. Measurements of different physico-chemical properties of nano-emulsions were taken according to size, electrophoretic mobility, conductivity, viscosity, turbidity, cristallization and melting point. The RHLB was calculated for each formulation in order to achieve maximum stability.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21936893 PMCID: PMC3200990 DOI: 10.1186/1477-3155-9-41
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Nanobiotechnology ISSN: 1477-3155 Impact factor: 10.435
Lower and Upper Constraint for each ingredient in oil phase
| Oil | Lower Constraint (%) | Upper Constraint (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Rapeseed oil | 20 | 80 |
| Miglyol | 20 | 80 |
| Salmon oil | 2 | 10 |
Mixture plan used for the cosmetic matrix
| N° Experience | Rapeseed oil | Miglyol | Salmon oil |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0.7800 | 0.2000 | 0.0200 |
| 2 | 0.7000 | 0.2000 | 0.1000 |
| 3 | 0.2000 | 0.7800 | 0.0200 |
| 4 | 0.2000 | 0.7000 | 0.1000 |
| 5 | 0.7400 | 0.2000 | 0.0600 |
| 6 | 0.4900 | 0.4900 | 0.0200 |
| 7 | 0.4500 | 0.4500 | 0.1000 |
| 8 | 0.2000 | 0.7400 | 0.0600 |
| 9 | 0.4700 | 0.4700 | 0.0600 |
| 10 | 0.6250 | 0.3350 | 0.0400 |
| 11 | 0.585 | 0.3350 | 0.0800 |
| 12 | 0.3350 | 0.6250 | 0.0400 |
| 13 | 0.3350 | 0.5850 | 0.0800 |
Main fatty acid compositions of different oils by gas chromatography (area %)
| Fatty acids | Rapeseed oil | Miglyol | Salmon oil | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.16 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 55.09 | 0.81 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 41.47 | 0.14 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.21 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.87 | 0.06 | 2.40 | 0.02 | |
| 4.39 | 0.35 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 15.34 | 0.18 | |
| 1.70 | 0.55 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 4.35 | 0.07 | |
| 0.53 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| 0.16 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 2.55 | 0.03 | |
| 59.76 | 0.67 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 23.18 | 0.33 | |
| 3.18 | 0.20 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 2.66 | 0.08 | |
| 1.21 | 0.12 | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - | |
| 19.27 | 0.25 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 6.77 | 0.01 | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.61 | 0.03 | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.19 | 0.01 | |
| 9.53 | 0.07 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 2.64 | 0.03 | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 7.35 | 0.01 | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | - | - | |
| 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 17.48 | 0.09 | |
Data obtained are the average ± standard deviation in triplicate.
sd: standard deviation
Estimation of model coefficients (Equation 1)
| Coefficient | Size distribution of emulsion (nm) | Mobility electrophoretic (μmcm/Vs) | HLB | Turbidity | Melting onset |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| b1 | 192.520* | -5.053** | 7.543*** | 48761.993*** | -23.31 |
| b2 | 276.223* | -5.605** | 12.674*** | 18764.217* | 20.87 |
| b3 | 6582.411 | -176.643 | -91.207 | 528043.223 | 7849.77*** |
| b12 | -327.298 | 6.421 | 5.867 | -91049.791* | 14.03 |
| b13 | -7249.278 | 212.419 | 127.855 | -884315.817 | -8481.72** |
| b23 | -8417.213 | 218.825 | 143.770* | -709495.692 | -8998.93** |
| b123 | 2206.082 | -105.357 | -59.960 | 898519.743 | -233.36 |
| R2 | 0.89 | 0.82 | 0.99 | 0.95 | 0.95 |
Meaning of each star: * 95%, ** 99%, *** 99.9% confidence level
*NTU: Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU)
b1: rapeseed oil; b2: miglyol; b3: salmon oil
Figure 1Variation of HLB in function of different oil mixture.
Experimental and calculated values of the different response
| Response | Model value | Experimental value |
|---|---|---|
| Size (nm) | 136.38 | 139.74 ± 1.09 |
| Mobility electrophoretic (μmcm/Vs) | -3.56 | -4.90 ± 0.28 |
| Turbidity (NTU) | 12493 | 16373 ± 200 |
| HLB | 11.54 | 10.76 ± 1.02 |
| Melting onset (°C) | -15.9 | -16.5 ± 0.93 |
Figure 2Variation of turbidity in function of oil type.
Results of saponification and acid indexes and balance lipophilic-hydrophilic (HLB) for rapeseed oil, salmon oil and soya lecithin
| Experimental results | Rapeseed oil | Salmon oil | Soya lecithin |
|---|---|---|---|
| Saponification index | 215.98 ± 0.07 | 201.96 ± 0.16 | 215.98 ± 0.05 |
| Acid index | 151.47 ± 0.56 | 112.20 ± 0.73 | 280.50 ± 0.26 |
| Balance Lipophilic -Hydrophilic (HLB) | 8.5 | 16 | 4.6 |
Data obtained are the average ± standard deviation in triplicate.
Results of melting and crystalization of used bulk oils
| Analyzed oil | | |
|---|---|---|
| Rapeseed oil | -25.3 ± 0.07 | -54.9 ± 0.07 |
| Salmon oil | -24.7 ± 0.82 | -18.7 ± 0.42 |
| Miglyol | -2.1 ± 0.35 | -30.2 ± 0.28 |
Data obtained are the average ± standard deviation in triplicate.
Figure 3DSC thermogram showing the crystallization and melting point of a W/O emulsion sample 7 (the red curve presents the melting point and blue curve presents the crystallization point).