| Literature DB >> 35049568 |
Meenakshi Srinivas Iyer1, Anil Kumar Gujjari1, Sathishbabu Paranthaman2, Amr Selim Abu Lila3,4, Khaled Almansour4, Farhan Alshammari4, El-Sayed Khafagy5,6, Hany H Arab7, Devegowda Vishakante Gowda2.
Abstract
Denture stomatitis (DS), usually caused by Candida infection, is one of the common denture-related complications in patients wearing dentures. Clove and cinnamon oils have been acknowledged for their anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial activity, and antifungal effects in the oral cavity. The aim of this study, therefore, was to prepare clove/cinnamon oils-loaded emulgel and to assess its efficacy in treating Candida albicans-associated denture stomatitis. Central composite design was adopted to formulate and optimize clove/cinnamon extracts-loaded emulgel. The formulated preparations were assessed for their physical appearance, particle size, viscosity, spreadability, and in-vitro drug release. In addition, in-vivo therapeutic experiments were conducted on 42 patients with denture stomatitis. The prepared emulgel formulations showed good physical characteristics with efficient drug release within 3 h. In addition, in-vivo antifungal studies revealed that the optimized formula significantly (p < 0.001) reduced Candida colony counts from the denture surface, compared to commercially available gel (240.38 ± 27.20 vs. 398.19 ± 66.73 CFU/mL, respectively). Furthermore, the optimized formula and succeeded in alleviating denture stomatitis-related inflammation with a better clinical cure rate compared to commercially available gel Collectively, herbal extracts-loaded emulgel might be considered an evolution of polyherbal formulations and might represent a promising alternative to the existing allopathic drugs for the treatment of denture stomatitis, with better taste acceptability and no side effects.Entities:
Keywords: Candida albicans; cinnamon extracts; clove extracts; denture stomatitis; super critical fluid extraction
Year: 2022 PMID: 35049568 PMCID: PMC8774589 DOI: 10.3390/gels8010033
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Gels ISSN: 2310-2861
Figure 1(A) Solubility of clove and cinnamon extracts in different surfactants and co-surfactants. (B) Emulsion formation from various Smix ratio.
Observed responses in central composite design of Emulgel.
| Formulation Code | X1 | X2 | R1 | R2 | R3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | 1 | 10 | 198.0 ± 14.7 | 91.6 ± 0.23 | 92.1 ± 0.12 |
| F2 | 3 | 11 | 224.2 ± 12.3 | 97.9 ± 0.09 | 96.4 ± 0.24 |
| F3 | 5 | 10 | 624.1 ± 12.5 | 92.5 ± 0.17 | 93.7 ± 0.12 |
| F4 | 3 | 4 | 347.7 ± 14.1 | 89.6 ± 0.22 | 90.1 ± 0.14 |
| F5 | 1 | 5 | 280.4 ± 14.5 | 86.4 ± 0.15 | 86.3 ± 0.28 |
| F6 | 3 | 7.5 | 387.9 ± 12.7 | 91.8 ± 0.31 | 89.2 ± 0.23 |
| F7 | 6 | 7.5 | 631.2 ± 16.4 | 90.4 ± 0.32 | 91.2 ± 0.16 |
| F8 | 1 | 7.5 | 258.8 ± 8.4 | 89.8 ± 0.12 | 90.1 ± 0.15 |
| F9 | 5 | 5 | 424.1 ± 10.3 | 89.1 ± 0.20 | 86.4 ± 0.34 |
All data represent the mean ± SD of three independent experiments.
Figure 23D-surface plots of (A) particle size; (B) drug content of clove; (C) drug content of cinnamon; and (D) overlay plot of optimized emulgel formulation.
Physicochemical parameters of clove/cinnamon extracts-loaded emulgel formulations.
| Formulation Code | pH | Viscosity | Spreadability | Extrudability (%) | Muco-adhesion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1 | 6.23 ± 0.12 | 2820.1 ± 0.86 | 90.16 ± 0.09 | 84.26 ± 0.07 | 5.8 ± 0.14 |
| F2 | 6.26 ± 0.06 | 4090.2 ± 0.21 | 89.03 ± 0.19 | 79.50 ± 0.15 | 8.5 ± 0.04 |
| F3 | 6.72 ± 0.16 | 6224.8 ± 0.13 | 81.16 ± 0.09 | 89.50 ± 0.57 | 13.9 ± 0.07 |
| F4 | 6.23 ± 0.06 | 4012.3 ± 0.62 | 87.67 ± 0.08 | 78.53 ± 0.15 | 8.0 ± 0.11 |
| F5 | 6.50 ± 0.10 | 4040.0 ± 0.53 | 86.83 ± 0.37 | 77.00 ± 0.06 | 10.2 ± 0.15 |
| F6 | 6.43 ± 0.15 | 4204.9 ± 0.36 | 63.5 ± 0.20 | 82.33 ± 0.57 | 10.4 ± 0.04 |
| F7 | 5.91 ± 0.09 | 7204.9 ± 0.36 | 76.33 ± 0.07 | 66.43 ± 0.15 | 15.4 ± 0.74 |
| F8 | 6.33 ± 0.05 | 4010.0 ± 0.33 | 84.33 ± 0.17 | 74.50 ± 0.57 | 9.7 ± 0.42 |
| F9 | 5.91 ± 0.09 | 6426.9 ± 0.39 | 76.33 ± 0.07 | 86.50 ± 0.57 | 13.9 ± 0.07 |
Data represent mean ± SD of three independent experiments.
Demographic details of study participants.
| Variable | Group | Total | Test Statistics | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Test | Control | ||||||||||
| Mean age | 61.57 ± 7.8 | 62.86 ± 6.5 | - | t = 0.58 | 0.564 | ||||||
| Age groups | <50 | Frequency | 3 | 1 | 4 | X2 = 1.333 | 0.721 | ||||
| Percent | 14.3 | 4.8 | 9.5 | ||||||||
| 51–60 | Frequency | 5 | 7 | 12 | |||||||
| Percent | 23.8 | 33.3 | 28.6 | ||||||||
| 61–70 | Frequency | 10 | 10 | 20 | |||||||
| Percent | 47.6 | 47.6 | 47.6 | ||||||||
| 70+ | Frequency | 3 | 3 | 6 | |||||||
| Percent | 14.3 | 14.3 | 14.3 | ||||||||
| Gender | Male | Frequency | 17 | 18 | 35 | X2 = 0.155 | 0.694 | ||||
| Percent | 81.0 | 85.7 | 83.3 | ||||||||
| Female | Frequency | 4 | 3 | 7 | |||||||
| Percent | 19 | 14.3 | 16.7 | ||||||||
| Use of denture | <5 | Frequency | 5 | 4 | 9 | X2 = 10.48 | 0.005 | ||||
| Percent | 23.8 | 19.0 | 21.4 | ||||||||
| >5 | Frequency | 16 | 17 | 33 | |||||||
| Percent | 76.2 | 21 | 78.6 | ||||||||
| Inflammation stages |
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| <5 | 50.0% | 50.0% | 0.0% | 100.0% | 33.3% | 50.0% | 16.7% | 100.0% | 0.334 | 0.156 | |
| >5 | 20.0% | 66.7% | 13.3% | 100.0% | 40.0% | 53.3% | 6.7% | 100.0% | |||
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||
| Nocturnal denture wear | Type of DS | I | Count | 6 | 0 | 6 | 8 | 0 | 8 | 0.590 | 0.645 |
| (46.2%) | (0.0%) | (28.6%) | (57.1%) | (0.0%) | (38.1%) | ||||||
| II | Count | 7 | 6 | 13 | 6 | 5 | 11 | ||||
| (53.8%) | (75.0%) | (61.9%) | (42.9%) | (71.4%) | (52.4%) | ||||||
| III | Count | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | ||||
| (0.0%) | (25.0%) | (9.5%) | (0.0%) | (28.6%) | (9.5%) | ||||||
Figure 3FTIR spectrum of (A) pure cinnamon extract, (B) pure clove extract, (C) physical mixture, and (D) clove/cinnamon extracts—loaded emulgel.
Figure 4Drug release profile for optimized emulgel formula and marketed (Candid®) gel.
Figure 5Mean fungal growth reduction (CFU/ mL) from the (A) palatal surface and (B) denture surface upon treatment with either test formula or a commercially available gel on days 0, 7, 14, and 21 post treatment.
Pre-intervention and post-intervention microbial growth with Group A and Group B from palatal and denture surface ranges.
| Test Group | Group A | Group B | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Palatal Surface | Denture Surface | Palatal Surface | Denture Surface | |
|
| 649.71 ± 282.82 | 1092.04 ± 150.12 | 677.38 ± 303.21 | 1160.76 ± 194.72 |
|
| ||||
|
| 432.80 ± 236.42 | 815.80 ± 145.04 | 449.80 ± 211.81 | 815.23 ± 95.4328 |
|
| 228.85 ± 136.85 | 572.42 ± 151.42 | 231.61 ± 115.77 | 568.66 ± 136.85 |
|
| 91.76 ± 61.07 | 240.38 ± 27.20 | 66.38 ± 39.11 | 398.19 ± 66.73 |
Percentage reduction of CFU in Group A and B.
| Day | Reduction of CFU in Percentage | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Palatal Surface | Denture Surface | |||
| Group A | Group B | Group A | Group B | |
| Baseline vs. 7 days | 33.38% | 33.59% | 25.2% | 27.06% |
| Baseline vs. 14 days | 64.78% | 64.80% | 47.58% | 49.36% |
| Baseline vs. 21 days | 85.9% | 90.20% | 77.98% | 71.68% |
| 7 days vs. 14 days | 47.2% | 48.51% | 29.80% | 30.03% |
| 14 days vs. 21 days | 59.9% | 71.34% | 70.05% | 44.03% |
| 7 days vs. 21 days | 78.7% | 85.2% | 58.07% | 30.80% |
Figure 6Pictorial representation of clinical response to treatment of Group A and B on Stage III and Stage II conditions on days 0, 7, 14, and 21 post treatment.
Clinical response to treatment between test and control groups.
| Group | Duration | Newton’s Classification | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | II | III | Cure | ||
| Group A | 0 | 6 | 13 | 2 | 0 |
| (18.8%) | (44.8%) | (100.0%) | (0.0%) | ||
| 7 days | 6 | 11 | 0 | 4 | |
| (18.8%) | (37.9%) | (0.0%) | (19.0%) | ||
| 14 days | 9 | 5 | 0 | 7 | |
| (28.1%) | (17.2%) | (0.0%) | (33.3%) | ||
| 21 days | 11 | 0 | 0 | 10 | |
| (34.4%) | (0.0%) | (0.0%) | (47.6%) | ||
| Group B | 0 | 9 | 10 | 2 | 0 |
| (22.5%) | (47.6%) | (100.0%) | (0.0%) | ||
| 7 days | 13 | 5 | 0 | 3 | |
| (32.5%) | (23.8%) | (0.0%) | (14.3%) | ||
| 14 days | 11 | 1 | 0 | 9 | |
| (27.5%) | (4.8%) | (0.0%) | (42.9%) | ||
| 21 days | 7 | 5 | 0 | 9 | |
| (17.5%) | (23.8%) | (0.0%) | (42.9%) | ||
Variables in center-composite design for preparation and optimization of emulgel.
| Factors | Levels | |
|---|---|---|
| Independent Variable | Low | High |
| X1 = Polymer (% | 1 | 6 |
| X2 = Smix (% | 4 | 11 |
|
|
| |
| R1 = Globule size (nm) | Decrease | |
| R2 = Drug Content clove (%) | Increase | |
| R2 = Drug Content cinnamon (%) | Increase | |