| Literature DB >> 29215572 |
Pey-Shiuan Wu1, Yi-Ching Lee2, Yi-Ching Kuo3, Chih-Chien Lin4.
Abstract
Although octyl methoxy cinnamates (OMC) is the most used Ultraviolet B (UVB) filter in sunscreen, it has poor light stability in emulsion system. In this study, OMC/SiO₂ nanoparticles were prepared via sol-gel emulsion method. Tetraethoxy silane (TEOS) was used as the silica source to encapsulate OMC. Modification of experimental parameters such as stirring speed of condensation reaction and emulsion condition, pH value of acid-catalyzed, surfactant and different percentage of TEOS and OMC, adding of OMC and surfactant to different phase may affect the particle size, and yield and entrapment efficiency in preparation process of OMC/SiO₂ nanoparticles. Concluding all the parameter, we found that when condensation reaction and emulsion conditions are at 1000 rpm, pH 1.5, Span 80/Tween 20, TEOS/OMC ratios 1:1, OMC and surfactants added in oil phase, resulting in smaller particle sizes 476.5 nm, higher yield 95.8%, and higher entrapment efficiency 61.09%. Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) analysis demonstrated that OMC/SiO₂ nanoparticles were successfully prepared. In vitro release profile supposed that OMC/SiO₂ nanoparticles can delay OMC releasing and had 60.83% decreasing of cumulative amount. Therefore, the OMC/SiO₂ nanoparticles have the potential to develop as new sunscreen materials in the use for cosmetics field in the future.Entities:
Keywords: OMC/SiO2 nanoparticles; in vitro release profile; octyl methoxy cinnamates (OMC); sol-gel emulsion method; tetraethoxy silane (TEOS)
Year: 2017 PMID: 29215572 PMCID: PMC5746924 DOI: 10.3390/nano7120434
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.076
Change experimental parameters to the effect of octyl methoxy cinnamates (OMC)/SiO2 nanoparticles.
| Sample | Agitating Speed (rpm) | pH Value | Surfactant | TEOS:OMC |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 600 | 1.5 | Span 80 | 1:1 |
| 2 | 800 | 1.5 | Span 80 | 1:1 |
| 3 | 1000 | 1.5 | Span 80 | 1:1 |
| 4 | 1000 | 1.0 | Span 80 | 1:1 |
| 5 | 1000 | 2.0 | Span 80 | 1:1 |
| 6 | 1000 | 1.5 | Span 80 | 1:1 |
| 7 | 1000 | 1.5 | Span 80/Tween 20 = 1 | 1:1 |
| 8 | 1000 | 1.5 | Span 80/Tween 20 = 1 | 2:3 |
| 9 | 1000 | 1.5 | Span 80/Tween 20 = 1 | 1:2 |
The effect of OMC and surfactant added in different phase.
| Sample | Agitating Speed (rpm) | pH Value | Surfactant (Span 80/Tween 20) | Phase of OMC | Phase of Tween 20 | TEOS: OMC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | 1000 | 1.5 | 1 | water | oil | 1:1 |
| 10 | 1000 | 1.5 | 1 | water | water | 1:1 |
| 11 | 1000 | 1.5 | 1 | oil | oil | 1:1 |
Figure 1The scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of the OMC/SiO2 nanoparticles (a,b) and hollow spheres of OMC/SiO2 nanoparticles (c,d).
Particle sizes and yield of OMC/SiO2 nanoparticles.
| Sample | Yield (%) | Particle Sizes ± SD (nm) | PDI |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 33.65 | 1163.3 ± 107.8 | 0.56 ± 0.09 |
| 2 | 35.80 | 1147.2 ± 213.2 | 0.59 ± 0.04 |
| 3 | 79.90 | 1093.2 ± 95.1 | 0.44 ± 0.05 |
| 4 | 42.06 | 900.0 ± 200.7 | 0.65 ± 0.09 |
| 5 | 24.25 | 1517.7 ± 156.0 | 0.40 ± 0.03 |
| 6 | 79.90 | 1093.2 ± 200.7 | 0.44 ± 0.05 |
| 7 | 87.19 | 683.0 ± 52.1 | 0.30 ± 0.01 |
| 8 | 80.05 | 1022.4 ± 70.4 | 0.24 ± 0.19 |
| 9 | 64.51 | 1237.0 ± 116.0 | 0.13 ± 0.08 |
| 10 | 74.38 | 796.3 ± 33.2 | 0.42 ± 0.18 |
| 11 | 95.80 | 476.5 ± 06.9 | 0.18 ± 0.15 |
Figure 2Entrapment efficiency (EE) and loading capacity (LC) of OMC/SiO2 nanoparticles.
Figure 3Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy of OMC/SiO2 nanoparticles.
Figure 4Release profile of OMC from OMC/SiO2 nanoparticles.