| Literature DB >> 26283081 |
Muhammad Faheem Akhtar1, Nazar Muhammad Ranjha2, Muhammad Hanif2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The present work objective was to prepare and to observe the effect of ethylene glycol dimethacrylate on swelling and on drug release behavior of pH-sensitive acrylic acid-polyvinyl alcohol hydrogel.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26283081 PMCID: PMC4539711 DOI: 10.1186/s40199-015-0123-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Daru ISSN: 1560-8115 Impact factor: 3.117
Fig. 1Possible structure of synthesized acrylic acid–polyvinyl alcohol hydrogel
A list of different formulations of AA–PVA hydrogel
| Sample code | AA | PVA | AA/PVA | EGDMA | GA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (g/100 g solution) | (g/100 g solution) | (wt.%) | (g/100 g solution) | (g/100 g solution) | |
| S1 | 21 | 7.38 | 74/26 | 0.082 | 0.01 |
| S2 | 21 | 7.38 | 74/26 | 0.123 | 0.01 |
| S3 | 21 | 7.38 | 74/26 | 0.165 | 0.01 |
Swelling coefficients (Dynamic and equilibrium) of AA–PVA hydrogels using EGDMA and GA as crosslinkers
| Sample codes | Dynamic swelling coefficients | Equilibrium swelling coefficients | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.2 pH | 5.5 pH | 6.5 pH | 7.5 pH | 1.2 pH | 5.5 pH | 6.5 pH | 7.5 pH | |
| S1 | 2.9 | 3.29 | 4.32 | 4.82 | 10.19 | 11.72 | 18.11 | 23.85 |
| S2 | 2.58 | 2.9 | 4.08 | 4.33 | 10.07 | 11.53 | 17.67 | 21.4 |
| S3 | 2.26 | 2.56 | 3.76 | 4 | 9.88 | 11.25 | 17.03 | 19.8 |
Metformin amount loaded in different samples of AA–PVA hydrogel
| Sample code | Amount of metformin loaded | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| (g/g of dry gel) | |||
| Swelling method | Extraction method | Weight method | |
| S1 | 0.2194 | 0.22 | 0.2157 |
| S2 | 0.2065 | 0.2093 | 0.2029 |
| S3 | 0.1999 | 0.1995 | 0.1921 |
Effect of pH on dug release after 12 h drug release study
| Sample | Time (hours) | pH 1.2 | pH 5.5 | pH 7.5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | 12 | 26.02 % | 49.77 % | 80.42 % |
| S2 | 12 | 25.48 % | 47.48 % | 75.95 % |
| S3 | 12 | 22.81 % | 45.27 % | 71.76 % |
Fig. 2Swelling behavior after 8 h of AA–PVA hydrogel with different EGDMA content
Fig. 3Effect of EGDMA content on metformin HCl release after 12 h from AA–PVA hydrogel
Network parameters of AA–PVA hydrogels
| Sample code |
| Χ |
|
|
|
| Gel fraction (%) | Porosity (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | 0.041929 | 0.513976 | 208.8924 | 97.35177 | 4.291497 | 162.78 | 98.1 | 18.22 |
| S2 | 0.046729 | 0.515576 | 181.6807 | 97.35177 | 3.732457 | 158.61 | 98.9 | 14.2 |
| S3 | 0.050505 | 0.516835 | 143.1054 | 97.35177 | 2.939966 | 154.45 | 99.35 | 11.21 |
Effect of EGDMA concentration on release kinetics of AA–PVA hydrogel at different pH
| Sample code | EGDMA content (% w/w) | pH | Zero order kinetics | First order kinetics | Higuchi Model | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ko (h¯1) | r | K1 (h¯1) | r | K2 (h¯1) | r | |||
| S1 | 0.082 | 1.2 | 2.221 | 0.976 | 0.026 | 0.983 | 0.104 | 0.995 |
| 5.5 | 4.016 | 0.992 | 0.058 | 0.999 | 0.186 | 0.998 | ||
| 7.5 | 5.833 | 0.976 | 0.137 | 0.997 | 0.274 | 0.996 | ||
| S2 | 0.123 | 1.2 | 2.179 | 0.983 | 0.025 | 0.988 | 0.102 | 0.997 |
| 5.5 | 3.953 | 0.99 | 0.056 | 0.997 | 0.183 | 0.998 | ||
| 7.5 | 5.47 | 0.966 | 0.116 | 0.993 | 0.259 | 0.993 | ||
| S3 | 0.165 | 1.2 | 2.028 | 0.98 | 0.023 | 0.984 | 0.094 | 0.994 |
| 5.5 | 3.852 | 0.99 | 0.053 | 0.997 | 0.179 | 0.997 | ||
| 7.5 | 5.407 | 0.963 | 0.108 | 0.988 | 0.256 | 0.99 | ||
Effect of EGDMA concentration on release mechanism of AA–PVA hydrogel
| Sample code | EGDMA content (%w/w) | pH | r | Release exponent (n) | Order of release |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | 0.082 | 1.2 | 0.983 | 0.991 | non-fickian |
| 5.5 | 0.996 | 0.875 | non-fickian | ||
| 7.5 | 0.995 | 0.665 | non-fickian | ||
| S2 | 0.123 | 1.2 | 0.987 | 0.989 | non-fickian |
| 5.5 | 0.994 | 0.929 | non-fickian | ||
| 7.5 | 0.99 | 0.689 | non-fickian | ||
| S3 | 0.165 | 1.2 | 0.989 | 0.999 | non-fickian |
| 5.5 | 0.996 | 0.991 | non-fickian | ||
| 7.5 | 0.985 | 0.741 | non-fickian |
Fig. 4FTIR spectra of PVA (a), acrylic acid (b), AA–PVA unloaded hydrogel (c) and drug loaded AA–PVA hydrogel (d)
Fig. 5SEM images of S1 sample (a) and drug loaded S1 sample (b)