| Literature DB >> 34943683 |
Loredana Nicoleta Hilițanu1, Liliana Mititelu-Tarțău1, Grațiela Eliza Popa2, Beatrice Rozalina Buca1, Liliana Lăcrămioara Pavel3, Ana-Maria Pelin4, Andreea-Daniela Meca5, Maria Bogdan5, Daniela Angelica Pricop6.
Abstract
Nanoantibiotics have proved improved pharmacokinetic characteristics and antimicrobial features. Recent studies have shown non-toxicity, non-immunogenicity, antioxidant, anti-hyperlipidemic, and hepatocyte protective actions, among other advantages of chitosan-based nanoparticles. The purpose of our study was the structural analysis of novel chitosan-coated vesicles entrapping erythromycin (ERT) and the assessment of their biocompatibility in mice. According to the group in which they were randomly assigned, the mice were treated orally with one of the following: distilled water; chitosan; ERT; chitosan vesicles containing ERT. Original nanosystems entrapping ERT in liposomes stabilized with chitosan were designed. Their oral administration did not produce sizeable modifications in the percentages of the leukocyte formula elements, of some blood constants useful for evaluating the hepatic and renal function, respectively, and of some markers of oxidative stress and immune system activity, which suggests a good biocompatibility in mice. The histological examination did not reveal significant alterations of liver and kidney architecture in mice treated with chitosan liposomes entrapping ERT. The results indicate the designed liposomes are a promising approach to overcome disadvantages of conventional ERT treatments and to amplify their benefits and can be further studied as carrier systems.Entities:
Keywords: biocompatibility; chitosan; erythromycin; mice; nanovesicles
Year: 2021 PMID: 34943683 PMCID: PMC8698811 DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics10121471
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Antibiotics (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6382
pH values of suspensions containing ERT.
| Solution | pH |
|---|---|
| Erythromicyn vesicles (ERT) | 6.12 |
| Erythromycin vesicles in chitosan (before dialysis) (ERT-non dialysed-ves) | 4.00 |
| Erythromycin vesicles in chitosan (after dialysis) (ERT-ves) | 6.02 |
Figure 1SEM micrograph for ERT-ves (A) and the dimensional histogram (B) corresponding to the image.
Figure 2Diameter distribution of lipid vesicles loading ERT.
Figure 3Zeta potential of chitosan-free ERT vesicles (A) and chitosan-coated ERT vesicles (B).
Figure 4Calibration curve (A) of ERT solution and the absorption spectra (B) of ERT-ves.
Blood erythrocyte, Hb and Ht levels in animals treated with CHIT, ERT, ERT-ves (data are expressed as arithmetic mean ± S.D. of mean values for 6 animals per group).
| Point in Time | GR (mil/μL) | Hb (g/mL) | Ht (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 24 h | 8.50 ± 1.05 | 12.67 ± 2.58 | 43.67 ± 2.73 |
| 7 days | 9.77 ± 0.14 | 15.12 ± 0.57 | 41.48 ± 1.32 | |
| CHIT | 24 h | 9.34 ± 0.57 | 15.41 ± 0.25 | 41.50 ± 0.14 |
| 7 days | 9.79 ± 0.10 | 15.67 ± 0.38 | 42.01 ± 0.57 | |
| ERT | 24 h | 9.80 ± 0.73 | 15.37 ± 1.58 | 41.52 ± 0.70 |
| 7 days | 9.82 ± 0.25 | 15.40 ± 0.42 | 41.55 ± 2.38 | |
| ERT-ves | 24 h | 9.59 ± 1.28 | 15.24 ± 0.73 | 40.69 ± 3.14 |
| 7 days | 9.64 ± 0.16 | 15.23 ± 0.42 | 40.72 ± 0.67 |
Leukocyte formula in animals treated with CHIT, ERT, ERT-ves (data are expressed as the arithmetic mean ± S.D. of mean values for 6 mice per group).
| Point in Time | Leucokyte Formula | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % | ||||||
| PMN | Ly | E | M | B | ||
| Control | 24 h | 19.72 ± 2.42 | 77.83 ± 4.59 | 0.47 ± 0.26 | 1.78 ± 1.23 | 0.20 ± 0.07 |
| 7 days | 19.73 ± 2.95 | 77.86 ± 3.72 | 0.52 ± 0.48 | 2.05 ± 1.81 | 0.22 ± 0.13 | |
| CHIT | 24 h | 18.74 ± 2.87 | 79.26 ± 4.42 | 0.57 ± 0.52 | 1.23 ± 1.17 | 0.20 ± 0.03 |
| 7 days | 18.73 ± 1.91 | 80.88 ± 1.82 | 0.72 ± 0.85 | 1.45 ± 1.22 | 0.20 ± 0.17 | |
| ERT | 24 h | 19.44 ± 3.23 | 77.33 ± 4.86 | 0.53 ± 0.42 | 2.45 ± 1.07 | 0.25 ± 0.07 |
| 7 days | 19.35 ± 3.74 | 76.05 ± 5.42 | 0.57 ± 0.71 | 2.98 ± 1.25 | 0.28 ± 0.20 | |
| ERT-ves | 24 h | 18.75 ± 3.23 | 78.97 ± 4.59 | 0.56 ± 0.59 | 1.47 ± 0.26 | 0.25 ± 0.13 |
| 7 days | 18.77 ± 2.42 | 79.45 ± 2.84 | 0.55 ± 0.52 | 0.95 ± 0.52 | 0.27 ± 0.23 | |
ALT, AST, and LDH levels in animals treated with CHIT, ERT, ERT-ves (data are expressed as arithmetic mean ± S.D. of mean values for 6 animals per group).
| Point in Time | ALT (U/mL) | AST (U/mL) | LDH (U/L) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 24 h | 40.30 ± 3.19 | 120.50 ± 19.29 | 1254.17 ± 165.33 |
| 7 days | 43.33 ± 3.62 | 119.00 ± 18.17 | 1250.88 ± 167.04 | |
| CHIT | 24 h | 42.17 ± 5.21 | 159.33 ± 35.20 | 1311.27 ± 249.19 |
| 7 days | 46.83 ± 6.43 | 161.17 ± 37.62 | 1904.33 ± 264.80 ** | |
| ERT | 24 h | 39.30 ± 6.17 | 120.50 ± 18.43 | 1302.13 ± 101.33 |
| 7 days | 37.8 ± 4.38 | 117.17 ± 12.29 | 1689.00 ± 96.49 ** | |
| ERT-ves | 24 h | 39.67 ± 5.04 | 140.50 ± 28.33 | 1398.17 ± 185.43 |
| 7 days | 41.00 ± 5.33 | 142.00 ± 31.71 | 1407.67 ± 294.90 |
** p < 0.01 compared to control group.
Urea and creatinine levels in animals treated with CHIT, ERT, ERT-ves (data are expressed as arithmetic mean ± S.D. of mean values for 6 animals per group).
| Point of Time | Urea (mg/mL) | Creatinine (mg/dL) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 24 h | 47.83 ± 6.43 | 0.38 ± 0.02 |
| 7 days | 45.00 ± 5.87 | 0.39 ± 0.02 | |
| CHIT | 24 h | 46.67 ± 1.37 | 0.38 ± 0.02 |
| 7 days | 42.33 ± 4.03 | 0.37 ± 0.03 | |
| ERT | 24 h | 45.83 ± 1.94 | 0.38 ± 0.01 |
| 7 days | 42.67 ± 8.31 | 0.37 ± 0.01 | |
| ERT-ves | 24 h | 49.33 ± 3.14 | 0.37 ± 0.01 |
| 7 days | 50.67 ± 2.07 | 0.37 ± 0.03 |
Effects of CHIT, ERT, ERT-ves on OC, PC, and BC values in mice (values are presented as the arithmetic mean ± S.D. of mean values for 6 animals per group).
| Point of Time | OC | PC | BC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 24 h | 808.33 ± 25.00 | 531.50 ± 15.60 | 715.67 ± 10.76 |
| 7 days | 787.17 ± 30.80 | 529.67 ± 13.02 | 712.33 ± 9.69 | |
| CHIT | 24 h | 805.40 ± 29.73 | 527.43 ± 14.48 | 713.55 ± 9.80 |
| 7 days | 794.43 ± 29.58 | 530.67 ± 14.55 | 719.40 ± 11.48 | |
| ERT | 24 h | 811.21 ± 29.47 | 530.83 ± 15.05 | 715.33 ± 11.58 |
| 7 days | 791.17 ± 29.53 | 532.55 ± 14.03 | 717.67 ± 13.47 | |
| ERT-ves | 24 h | 806.67 ± 29.76 | 530.60 ± 14.58 | 717.55 ± 16.33 |
| 7 days | 799.17 ± 30.11 | 533.21 ± 13.24 | 719.17 ± 17.48 |
Figure 5Histopathological images of hepatic architecture in animals treated with distilled water (A), CHIT (B), ERT (C), ERT-ves (D). (H&E stain × 20).
Figure 6Histopathological images of kidney architecture in animals treated with distilled water (A), CHIT (B), ERT (C), ERT-ves (D) (H&E stain × 20).