| Literature DB >> 33342321 |
Muhammed Ossama1, Caroline Lamie1, Mohamed Tarek2, Hebatallah A Wagdy2, Dalia A Attia1, Mohamed M Elmazar3.
Abstract
Recurrent aphthous ulcer (RAU) is a well-known painful, inflammatory disease with uncertain etiology for which local symptomatic therapy is only available. The aim of this study was to formulate and characterize muco-adhesive sponges containing a mixture of tenoxicam and miconazole nitrate to manage pain, inflammation and avoid candida infection that may accompany RAU due to poor oral hygiene. Two polymers at different concentrations were used to prepare sponges applying simple freeze-drying. Medicated chitosan (2%) sponges (mC2) showed acceptable physical appearance, surface pH (6.3 ± 0.042), porosity (25.7% ± 1.8), swelling index (5.7 ± 0.11), in-vivo and ex-vivo muco-adhesion time (115 min.±0.813 and 155 min.±1.537, respectively), ex-vivo muco-adhesion force (0.09 N ± 0.002) and scanning electron microscope (SEM) images. For concurrent clear-cut determination of tenoxicam and miconazole nitrate from mC2, a new UPLC method was developed and validated. mC2 sponges exhibited superior in-vitro drug release profiles where ∼100% of tenoxicam released within 5 min for fast pain relief with a more prolonged miconazole nitrate release. Furthermore, in-vivo animal study revealed that mC2 caused a significant decrease in the acetic acid-induced ulcer size in rats after 6 days of treatment (p < .0001) compared to negative and positive controls. Additionally, histopathological examination showed faster healing with complete restoration of the normal oral histology in rats. The present study concludes that chitosan sponge loaded with a combination of tenoxicam and miconazole nitrate could improve healing of RAU cases.Entities:
Keywords: CMC; Freeze-drying technique; chitosan; mucoadhesive buccal sponges; recurrent aphthous ulcer
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33342321 PMCID: PMC7758044 DOI: 10.1080/10717544.2020.1858999
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Drug Deliv ISSN: 1071-7544 Impact factor: 6.819
Composition of prepared sponges.
| Formula code | Concentration of polymer solutions (% w/w) | Distilled water (mL) | 1% acetic acid solution (mL) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CMC | Ch | |||
| M0.5 | 0.5 | – | 30 | – |
| M1 | 1 | – | 30 | – |
| M2 | 2 | – | 30 | – |
| C0.5 | – | 0.5 | – | 30 |
| C1 | – | 1 | – | 30 |
| C2 | – | 2 | – | 30 |
*0.01% miconazole nitrate and 0.006% tenoxiam were added to the selected sponge.
Characterization of the prepared plain/medicated sponges.
| Parameter | Muco-adhesion time (minutes) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Formula | Surface pH | Porosity (%) | Swelling index |
|
| |
| Plain sponge | ||||||
| C0.5 | 6.36 ± 0.026 | 21 ± 1.2 | 0.48 ± 0.01 | 60 ± 0.547 | **NA | **NA |
| C1 | 6.35 ± 0.037 | 23.5 ± 0.9 | 3.92 ± 0.06 | 120 ± 1.1136 | **NA | **NA |
| C2 | 6.33 ± 0.01 | 26 ± 1.5 | 5.23 ± 0.09 | 116 ± 1.11 | **NA | **NA |
| M1 | 6.79 ± 0.03 | 35 ± 2.5 | 3.788 ± 0.1 | 15 ± 2.64 | **NA | **NA |
| *Medicated sponge | ||||||
| mC0.5 | 6.29 ± 0.091*** | 22 ± 0.88*** | 0.55 ± 0.04*** | 59 ± 1.62 *** | 90 ± 0.53 | 0.014 ± 0.0115 |
| mC1 | 6.26 ± 0.066*** | 23.8 ± 1.1*** | 3.68 ± 0.03*** | 123 ± 0.113*** | 136 ± 0.197 | 0.032 ± 0.0057 |
| mC2 | 6.30 ± 0.042*** | 25.7 ± 1.8*** | 5.70 ± 0.11*** | 115 ± 0.813*** | 155 ± 1.537 | 0.09 ± 0.002 |
| mM1 | 6.68 ± 0.12*** | 36.2 ± 1.7*** | 3.529 ± 0.8*** | 19 ± 0.48*** | 30 ± 0.1 | 0.06 ± 0.002 |
*Medicated sponge contains 10 mg% miconazole nitrate and 6 mg% tenoxiam. **NA means Not Applied experiment. *** Symbol means results insignificantly different (p > .05) from plain sponges.
Inter-day and Intra-day precision of tenoxicam and miconazole nitrate.
| Tenoxicam | Miconazole Nitrate | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concentration (μg/mL) | Inter-Day precision | Intra-Day precision | Concentration (μg/mL) | Inter-Day precision | Intra-Day precision |
| % RSD* | %RSD* | % RSD* | %RSD* | ||
| 50 | 2.00 | 1.85 | 50 | 2.31 | 1.26 |
| 150 | 1.30 | 0.26 | 150 | 0.69 | 0.16 |
| 200 | 1.38 | 0.21 | 400 | 0.46 | 0.41 |
*Average of 3 times.
Accuracy of tenoxicam and miconazole nitrate.
| Tenoxicam | Miconazole nitrate | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Theoretical | % Recovery* | %RSD* | Theoretical | % Recovery* | %RSD* |
| 5 | 99.42 | 1.06 | 5 | 101.86 | 1.39 |
| 10 | 98.05 | 2.34 | 10 | 97.07 | 0.38 |
| 20 | 98.24 | 1.74 | 20 | 100.42 | 1.92 |
| 30 | 99.50 | 2.49 | 30 | 102.10 | 1.75 |
| 50 | 101.71 | 1.85 | 50 | 95.27 | 1.26 |
| 100 | 99.78 | 0.11 | 100 | 99.71 | 0.56 |
| 150 | 100.31 | 0.26 | 150 | 101.53 | 0.16 |
| 200 | 99.80 | 0.21 | 400 | 100.34 | 0.41 |
| 500 | 99.69 | 1.94 | |||
*Average of 3 times.
Figure 1.Chromatogram for the newly developed medicated sponge under the optimum conditions.
Figure 2.In-vitro release profiles of tenoxicam and miconazole nitrate from: (a) mC2 sponge and (b) mM1 sponge.
Figure 3.SEM micrographs of: (a) Ch plain sponge [C2], (b) CMC plain sponge [M1], medicated C2 sponge [mC2] at (c) magnification of 20,000× and (d) magnification of 50,000×.
Figure 4.Ulcers’ area progression over six days for the control group (C), the plain group (P) and the medicated group (M).
Figure 5.Picture of animals showing induced ulcer at day 0 for: (a) control, (c) plain and (e) medicated groups and at day 6 for: (b) control, (d) plain and (f) medicated groups. The heads of the black arrows point at the ulcerated areas.
Figure 6.Representative photomicrographs (100x) of sections in the lips stained with H & E of (a) the control group of rats, (b) the group of rats receiving plain chitosan sponge and (c) the group of rats receiving medicated chitosan sponge.