| Literature DB >> 34465992 |
Jung Suk Kim1, Fakhar Ud Din2, Sang Min Lee1, Dong Shik Kim1, Mi Ran Woo1, Seunghyun Cheon1, Sang Hun Ji1, Jong Oh Kim3, Yu Seok Youn4, Kyung Taek Oh5, Soo-Jeong Lim6, Sung Giu Jin7, Han-Gon Choi1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to screen various drug delivery systems for improving the aqueous solubility and oral bioavailability of sildenafil. Three representative techniques, solid self-nanoemulsifying drug delivery systems (SNEDDS), amorphous microspheres and crystalline microspheres, were compared.Entities:
Keywords: amorphous microspheres; aqueous microenvironment; crystalline microspheres; oral bioavailability; sildenafil; solid self-nanoemulsifying drug delivery system
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34465992 PMCID: PMC8402991 DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S324206
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Nanomedicine ISSN: 1176-9114
Figure 1Schematic design of this study.
Composition of Sildenafil-Loaded Amorphous and Crystalline Microspheres
| Formulations | Amorphous Microspheres | Crystalline Microspheres |
|---|---|---|
| Sildenafil (g) | 1 | 1 |
| PVP (g) | 6 | 6 |
| Labrasol (g) | 1 | 1 |
| Ethanol (mL) | 200 | 0 |
| Distilled water (mL) | 0 | 200 |
Figure 2Composition of liquid SNEDDS: (A) Ternary phase diagram; (B) Effect of Captex 300 concentration on the emulsion droplet size; (C) Effect of Transcutol HP concentration on the emulsion droplet size. Each value represents the mean ± S.D. *Indicates p < 0.05 when compared with 80/20, 75/25 and 70/30. #Indicates p < 0.05 when compared with 75/10/15, 65/20/15 and 60/25/15.
Figure 3Scanning electron micrographs: (A) Sildenafil powder (× 3000); (B) Amorphous microspheres (× 3000); (C) Crystalline microspheres (× 2000); and (D) Solid SNEDDS (× 3000).
Figure 4Particle-size distribution of sildenafil and prepared formulations.
Figure 5Differential scanning calorimetry thermograms (A) and X-ray diffractometer results (B).
Figure 6Comparison of amorphous microspheres, crystalline microspheres, solid SNEDDS and drug powder in aqueous solubility. *Indicates p < 0.05 when compared with crystalline microsphere and drug powder.
Figure 7Dissolution profile of amorphous microspheres, crystalline microspheres, solid SNEDDS and drug powder.
Figure 8Plasma concentration–time profiles of sildenafil after oral administration of amorphous microspheres, crystalline microspheres, solid SNEDDS, and drug powder. Each value represents the mean ± S.D. (n = 6).
Pharmacokinetic Parameters
| Parameters | Drug Powder | Amorphous Microspheres | Crystalline Microspheres | Solid SNEDDS |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AUC (h⋅ng/mL) | 733.57 ± 184.15 | 1339.90 ± 416.53* | 1042.90 ± 119.90* | 1508.78 ± 343.95* |
| Cmax (ng/mL) | 235.00 ± 42.20 | 510.00 ± 94.00# | 367.50 ± 27.50* | 567.60 ± 98.90# |
| Tmax (h) | 0.50 ± 0.00 | 0.50 ± 0.00 | 0.50 ± 0.00 | 0.50 ± 0.00 |
| t1/2 (h) | 4.30 ± 0.43 | 4.01 ± 0.81 | 3.67 ± 0.48 | 4.33 ± 1.72 |
| Kel (h−1) | 0.16 ± 0.02 | 0.17 ± 0.06 | 0.19 ± 0.03 | 0.16 ± 0.08 |
Notes: Each value represents the mean ± S.D. (n = 6). *p < 0.05 compared with the drug powder. #p < 0.05 compared with the drug powder and crystalline microspheres.