| Literature DB >> 35515778 |
Yongtao Duan1, Abhishek Dhar2, Chetan Patel3, Mehul Khimani3, Swarnali Neogi2, Prolay Sharma2, Nadavala Siva Kumar4, Rohit L Vekariya5,6.
Abstract
Drug delivery technology has a wide spectrum, which is continuously being upgraded at a stupendous speed. Different fabricated nanoparticles and drugs possessing low solubility and poor pharmacokinetic profiles are the two major substances extensively delivered to target sites. Among the colloidal carriers, nanolipid dispersions (liposomes, deformable liposomes, virosomes, ethosomes, and solid lipid nanoparticles) are ideal delivery systems with the advantages of biodegradation and nontoxicity. Among them, nano-structured lipid carriers and solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNs) are dominant, which can be modified to exhibit various advantages, compared to liposomes and polymeric nanoparticles. Nano-structured lipid carriers and SLNs are non-biotoxic since they are biodegradable. Besides, they are highly stable. Their (nano-structured lipid carriers and SLNs) morphology, structural characteristics, ingredients used for preparation, techniques for their production, and characterization using various methods are discussed in this review. Also, although nano-structured lipid carriers and SLNs are based on lipids and surfactants, the effect of these two matrixes to build excipients is also discussed together with their pharmacological significance with novel theranostic approaches, stability and storage. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 35515778 PMCID: PMC9055574 DOI: 10.1039/d0ra03491f
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1Schematic diagram of the different types of nanoparticles.
Chart 1Classification of lipid-based nanoparticle drug delivery systems.
Advantages of SLNs over liposomes and polymeric nanoparticles
| Issue | Advantages of SLNs over liposomes | Advantages of SLNs over polymeric nanoparticles |
|---|---|---|
| Avoidance of organic solvents | Avoidance of organic solvents when desired | Avoidance of organic solvents when desired |
| Preparation and reproducibility | Excellent reproducibility and feasible large-scale production | Excellent reproducibility and feasible large-scale production with cost-effective high-pressure homogenization method as the preparation method[ |
| Stability | Increased stability of the active ingredient because of the rigid core lipid matrix[ | Increased product stability of about 3 years[ |
| Biodegradability | Both liposomes and SLNs are biodegradable | Lipids of SLNs are physiological and biodegradable, and hence have better biocompatibility and sterilization. On the other hand, polymeric nanoparticles may accumulate undesirably in the liver, spleen |
| Binding, entrapment and release | SLNs impose greater entrapment efficiency for hydrophobic drugs (since they do not contain an aqueous core with lipid bilayer like liposomes) | Drug delivery is extremely site specific for SLNs, whereas polymeric nanoparticles may produce non-specific drug delivery or show unpredictable release towards siRNAs[ |
| Ability to allow controlled release (similar to polymeric nanoparticles) and drug targeting by coating/attaching ligands to SLNs[ |
|
Fig. 2Schematic presentation of the complete structure of solid lipid nanoparticles.
Fig. 3Homogenization technique: (a) Hot homogenization technique and (b) Cold homogenization technique.
Chart 2Preparation of solid lipid nanoparticles by oil/water (o/w) microemulsion method.
Chart 3Solvent-emulsification diffusion technique for the synthesis of solid lipid nanoparticles.
Chart 4Solvent injection method for the synthesis of solid lipid nanoparticles.
Fig. 4w/o/w double emulsion technique for the preparation of solid lipid nanoparticles.
Fig. 5Ultrasonication technique for the preparation of solid lipid nanoparticles.
Fig. 6Super critical fluid technique for the preparation of solid lipid nanoparticles.
SLN formulations reported by different researchers
| Drug | Lipid | Surfactant/emulsifier | Co-Surfactant | Method for preparation of SLNs | Techniques for characterization of SLNs | Size (nm) | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amphotericin B | Compritol® ATO 888, Precirol ATO 5 and stearic acid, | Pluronic® F-68, Pluronic® F-127, | Solvent diffusion method | DLS, DSC, zeta potential | 111–415.8 |
| |
| Compritol® ATO 888 (glycerylbehenate), glycerylpalmitostearate (Precirol® ATO 5), medium chain triglyceride | Tween 20, Pluronic® F-127, Cremophor RH40, polyoxyethylene (40) stearate (Myrj 52) | HPH | DLS, zeta potential, HPLC, TEM, FTIR, DSC, PXRD, 1H NMR | 90–260 |
| ||
| Baclofen | Stearic acid | Epikuron 200 (92% phosphatidylcholine) | Propionic acid, butyric acid, and sodium taurocholate | Multiple (w/o/w) warm, microemulsion | DLS | 161.4 |
|
| BuspironeHCl | Cetyl alcohol, Spermaceti | Pluronic® F-68, Tween 80 | Emulsification-evaporation followed by ultrasonication | DLS | 86–123 |
| |
| Camptothecin | Soybean lecithin, stearic acid | Pluronic® F-68, Tween 80 | Glycerol, PEG 400, PPG | Hot HPH | TEM | 196.8 |
|
| Carvedilol | Stearic acid | Pluronic® F-68 | Sodium taurocholate and ethanol | Microemulsion | TEM, DLS | 120–200 and 600–800 |
|
| Clozapine | Trimyristin, tripalmitin, tristearin, soy phosphatidylcholine | Pluronic® F-68 | Ultrasonication method | DLS, zeta potential | 96.7 ± 3.8 to 163.3 ± 0.7 |
| |
| Crypto-Tanshinone | Glycerylmonostearate, Compritol 888 ATO | Soy lecithin, Tween 80, sodium dehydrocholate | Ultrasonic and high-pressure homogenization method | TEM, DLS, DSC | 121.4 ± 6.3 and 137.5 ± 7.1 |
| |
| Curcumin | Compritol 888 ATO | Soy lecithin, Tween 80 | Microemulsion | DLS, TEM | 134.6, 40–120 |
| |
| Tristearin | Polyoxyethylene (10) stearyl ether (Brij®S10), polyoxyethylene (100) stearyl ether (Brij® S100) | Oil-in-water emulsion technique | PCS, zeta potential | 111–350 |
| ||
| Cyclosporine A | Imwitor® 900 | Tagat®S, sodium cholate | HPH, hot HPH | DLS | 157, 143 |
| |
| Diazepam | Compritol 888 ATO, Imwitor® 900 | Pluronic® F-68, Tween 80 | Ultrasound techniques modified high-shear homogenization and | TEM | <500 |
| |
| Doxorubicin hydrochloride | Glycerylcaprate | Polyethylene glycol 660 hydrox-ystearate (Solutol®HS15) | Ultrasonic homogenization | DLS, zeta potential, DSC | 199 |
| |
| Fenofibrate | Vitamin E TPGS, Vitamin E 6–100 | Hot HPH | DLS | 58 |
| ||
| Hydrocortisone | Precirol® ATO 5, Compritol® 888 ATO, Rylo TM MG 14 Pharma, Dynasan® 114 Dynasan® 118, Tegin® 4100 | Tween 80 | Hot high pressure homogenization | DLS, DSC | 150–220 |
| |
| Ibuprofen | Trilaurin, tripalmitin, stearic acid | Pluronic®F127, sodium taurocholate | Solvent-free high-pressure homogenization (HPH) | DLS, X-ray powder diffraction, DSC, AFM | 111–121 (empty SLN) 175–189 (loaded sample) |
| |
| Idarubicin | Stearic acid | Epikuron 200 (soy phosphatidylcholine 95%) | Taurocholate sodium salt | Microemulsion | PCS, 90 PLUS | 80 ± 10((loaded sample)) |
|
| Emulsifying wax | Polyoxyl 20-stearyl ether (Brij 78), D-alpha-tocopheryl polyethylene glycol succinate (vitamin E TPGS),DSPE-PEG3000 | Sodium taurodeoxycholate (STDC), sodium tetradecylsulfate (STS) | PCS, Zetasizer nano Z | 94.4 (blank), 80–104 (loaded sample) |
| ||
| Ketoprofen | Beeswax and carnauba wax | Tween 80, egg lecithin | Microemulsion technique | PCS, DSC | 65–250 (loaded sample) |
| |
| Lopinavir | Compritol 888 ATO (glycerylbehenate) | Pluronic®F127 | Hot homogenization, ultrasonication | DLS, zeta potential, HPLC, DSC, WAXS, AFM | 230 |
| |
| Lovastatin | Triglyceride, and phosphatidylcholine 95% | Pluronic®F68 | Hot homogenization ultrasonication | DLS, HPLC, DSC, PXRD, LC-MS/MS | 60–119 |
| |
| Methotrexate | Stearic acid, monostearin, tristearin, and Compritol 888 ATO |
| Solvent diffusion method | DLS, zeta potential, TEM | 120–167 |
| |
| Nevirapine | Steric acid, Compritol 888 ATO | Dimethyldioctadecyl ammonium bromide (DODAB), Tween 80, Lecithin | 1-Butanol | Microemulsion | DLS, zeta potential, field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM), DSC | 153.1 |
|
| Nitrendipine | triglyceride and phosphatidylcholine | Pluronic®F68 | Hot homogenization ultrasonication method | DLS, zeta potential, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) | 110–140 |
| |
| Octadecylamine-fluorescein isothiocyanate | Stearic acid | Otcadecylamine, polyethylene glycol monostearate (PEG2000-SA) | Solvent diffusion | DLS, zeta potential | 203 |
| |
| Pentoxifylline | Stearic acid, cetyl alcohol, soy lecithin, | Tween 20, Pluronic F®68 | Homogenization followed by the ultrasonication | DLS, zeta-potential | 255–4000 |
| |
| Praziquantel | Hydrogenated castor oil | Poly vinyl alcohol (PVA) | Hot homogenization and ultrasonication | DLS, zeta-potential, SEM | 344.0 |
| |
| Puerarin | Monostearin, and soy lecithin | Pluronic F®68 | Solvent injection method | DLS and zeta-potential | 160 |
| |
| Quercetin | Glycerylmonostearat, soy lecithin | Tween-80 and PEG 400 | Emulsification-solidification | DLS, zeta-potential, TEM |
| ||
| Rifampicin | Stearic acid | PVA | Emulsion-solvent diffusion |
| |||
| Tobramycin | Stearic acid | Epikuron 200 | Sodium taurocholate | Microemulsion | DLS, TEM | 70–100 |
|
| Vinpocetine | Glycerylmonostearat, soy lecithin, polyoxyethylene hydrogenated castor oil | Tween 80 | Ultrasonic-solvent emulsification | DLS, TEM | 70–170 |
|