Lipid-Based Implants: Impact of Formulation Parameters

Marisa Nicolai; Vanessa Amaral; Cátia Antunes; Duangratana Shuwisitkul; Joana Portugal Mota

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1060.87

Paper Titles

Decylglucoside Microemulsion Systems Containing Coenzyme Q10: Formulation, Physicochemical Characterization and Stability
p.70

Preparation Process and Properties of Crosslinked Gelatin Beads for Drug Loading
p.74

Preparation of Eudragit^® L Beads for Intragastric Floating Drug Delivery
p.79

Lysozyme Release from Lipid-Based Implants
p.83

Lipid-Based Implants: Impact of Formulation Parameters
p.87

Formulation of Cold Pressed-Coconut Oil Dry Emulsion
p.91

Formulation and Physicochemical Evaluation of Topical Preparations Containing Extract of Clerodendrum disparifolium
p.95

Preparation of Virgin Coconut Oil Nanoemulsions by Phase Inversion Temperature Method
p.99

Factors Affecting Physical Properties of Prednisolone Loaded Nanoparticles Fabricated by Eletrohydrodynamic Atomization Technique
p.103

HomeAdvanced Materials ResearchAdvanced Materials Research Vol. 1060Lipid-Based Implants: Impact of Formulation...

Lipid-Based Implants: Impact of Formulation Parameters

Abstract:

Lipid implants have been attracting attention in recent years. However, to better understand these systems, more fundamental studies are required. The objective of this work was to evaluate the effect of some formulation parameters, namely lipid and drug type, implant shape/surface area and lipid blend ratio, on drug release rate. The developed implants were cylindrical or spherical in shape with an even surface. Caffeine release from glycerol-trimyristate implant was very fast when compared with glycerol-tristerate matrix. The latter allowed a 4 month controlled release in contrast with glycerol-trimyristate matrix (~ 5 days). Caffeine and theophylline presented similar release rates, despite their different aqueous solubilities. In addition, different lipid blend ratios provided different release profiles for caffeine.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Pharmaceutical Formulation and Development

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volume 1060)

Pages:

87-90

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1060.87

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

December 2014

Authors:

Marisa Nicolai*, Vanessa Amaral, Cátia Antunes, Duangratana Shuwisitkul, Joana Portugal Mota

Keywords:

Controlled Release, Drug Release, Implant, Lipid, Lipid Blend Ratio

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

References

[1] S. Koennings, E. Garcion, N. Faisant, P. Menei, J.P. Benoit, A. Goepferich: Int. J. Pharm. 314 (2006), p.145–152.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2005.08.031

Google Scholar

[2] M. Schwab, G. Sax, S. Schulze, G. Winter: J. Control. Release, 140 (2009) p.27–33.

Google Scholar

[3] F. Kreye, F. Siepmann, J. Siepmann: Expert Opinion on Drug Delivery, 5 (2008), p.291–307.

DOI: 10.1517/17425247.5.3.291

Google Scholar

[4] T. Estey, J. Kang, S.P. Schwendeman, J.F. Carpenter: J. Pharm. Sci. 95 (2006), p.1626–1639.

Google Scholar

[5] F. Kreye, F. Siepmann, J.F. Willart, M. Descamps, J. Siepmann: Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm, 78 (2011), p.394–400.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpb.2011.02.011

Google Scholar

[6] S. Koennings, A. Berie, J. Tessmar, T. Blunk, A. Goepferich: J. Control. Release, 119 (2007), p.173–181.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2007.02.008

Google Scholar

[7] D. Shuwisitkul in Biodegradable Implants With Different Drug Release Profiles, PhD Thesis, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin (2011).

Google Scholar