FORMULATION AND EVALUATION OF NIOSOMAL SUSPENSION OF CEFIXIME

  • Bhama Santhosh Kumar Amrita School of Pharmacy, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Amrita University, AIMS Health SciencesCampus, Kochi, Kerala, Indi
  • Rakhi Krishna Amrita School of Pharmacy, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Amrita University, AIMS Health Sciences Campus, Kochi, Kerala, Indi
  • Lakshmi Ps Amrita School of Pharmacy, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Amrita University, AIMS Health Sciences Campus, Kochi, Kerala, Indi
  • Deepa T Vasudev Amrita School of Pharmacy, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Amrita University, AIMS Health Sciences Campus, Kochi, Kerala, Indi
  • Sreeja C Nair LECTURER,DEPARTMENT OF PHARMACEUTICS, AMRITA SCHOOL OF PHARMACY,AMRITA VISHWAVIDYAPEETHAM UNIVERSITY, AIMS- PONEKKARA P.O, KOCHI, KERALA, INDIA.

Abstract

Objectives : The present study was aimed to overcome the problems associated with the drug such as bioavailability, to reduce the dosage regimen, half life and to determine the appropriateness of niosomal formulation as a drug carrier.

Methods: The niosomal suspension was prepared by thin film technique, by varying ratios of span 60 and cholesterol and varying the concentration of span 60. The prepared four formulations were evaluated for various parameters.

Results: The optimized formulation had a vesicular size of 250-400nm .Varying the concentration of span 60 ,the entrapment efficiency demonstrated that it had a considerable task.The highest entrapment efficiency was  95.3%. The kinetics study confirmed that the liberation of drug from the niosomal suspension is in a restricted manner. The statistical optimization showed that NS2 is the optimized formulation. The gastrointestinal enzymes showed no significant change in the release of drug from the formulation. The Zone of Inhibition showed that Optimized formulation has better activity than the marketed formulation. The MIC was found to be 0.05mg , hence can be used as a efficient carrier for delivery of Cefixime.

Conclusion: The present study concludes that the prepared Niosomal suspension is a convenient and efficiency carrier for the delivery of antibacterial drug. Besides this, it provided controlled delivery of drug.

 

 

 

 

 

Keywords: Niosomes, Cholesterol, Thin film technique, Vesicular size, Controlled drug delivery.

Author Biography

Sreeja C Nair, LECTURER,DEPARTMENT OF PHARMACEUTICS, AMRITA SCHOOL OF PHARMACY,AMRITA VISHWAVIDYAPEETHAM UNIVERSITY, AIMS- PONEKKARA P.O, KOCHI, KERALA, INDIA.
DEPARTMENT OF PHARMACEUTICS

References

1. Rajnish A, Ajay S. Release studies of ketoprofen niosome formulation. J Chem Pharm Res 2010;2;79-82.
2. Sandeep KS, Meenakshi C, Anilkumar N. Span-60 niosomal oral suspension of fluconazole: Formulation and in vitro evaluation. J Pharm Res Health Care 2009;1:142-56.
3. Pranshu T, Shaffi K. Niosomes: Formulation and evaluation. Int J Biopharm 2011;2:47-53.
4. Rogerson A, Cummings J, Willmott N, Florence AT. The distribution of doxorubicin in mice following administration in niosomes. J Pharm Pharm 1998;40:337-42.
5. Baillie AJ, Coombs GH, Dolan TF. Non-ionic surfactant vesicles, niosomes as delivery system for the anti-leishmanial drug sodium stribogluconate. J Pharm Pharm 1986;38:502-5.
6. Chauhan S, Luorence MJ. The Preparation of polyoxyethylene containing non-ionic surfactant vesicles. J Pharm Pharm 1989;41:6-10.
7. Blazek-Walsh AI, Rhodes DG. SEM imaging predicts quality of niosomes from maltodextrin-based proniosomes. Pharm Res 2001;18(23):656-61.
8. Nair AS, Vidhya KM, Saranya TR, Sreelakshy KR, Nair SC. Emulsomes: A novel liposomal formulation for sustained drug delivery. Int Res J Pharm Appl Sci 2013;3(5);192-6.
9. Naresh RA, Chandrashekhar G, Pillai GK, Udupa N. Antiinflammatory activity of niosome encapsulated diclofenac sodium with tween-85 in arthitic rats. Indian J Pharm 1994;26:46-8.
10. Khandare JN, Madhavi G, Tamhankar BM. Niosomesnovel drug delivery system. Eastern Pharm 1994;37:61-4.
11. Hunter CA, Dolan TF, Coombs GH, Baillie AJ. Vesicular systems (Niosomes and liposomes) for delivery of sodium stibogluconate in experimental murine visceral leishmaniasis. J Pharm Pharm 1988;40:161-5.
12. Malhotra M, Jain NK. Niosomes as drug carriers. Indian Drugs 1994;31:81-6.
13. Baby AA, Saroja S, Sabitha M. Mechanism of solubility of liquisolid formulation in non-volatile solvent: A review. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2012;4:710-5.
14. Raghavendra NR, Ram P, Bussetti SS. Formulation and evaluation of gas powered systems of cefixime tablets for controlled release. Int J Pharm Bio Sci 2010;1:12-6.
15. Shivanand P. Development and characterization of cefpodoxime proxetil niosomes. Int J Pharm World Res 2010;1:12-23.
16. Barbara L, Federica B, Teresa C, Roberto M, Anna, MD, Vittorio Z. New environmental sensitive system for colon-specific delivery of peptidic drugs. Int J Pharm 2008;358:44-9.
17. Shivakumar HN, Siva RK, Narasimha SM. Albumin microspheres for oral delivery of iron. J Drug Target 2010;18:36-44.
18. Solmaz G, Jaleh V, Afrooz S, Fatemeh A. Stability and antimicrobial effect of amikacin-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles. Int J Nanomed 2011;6:35-43.
19. Nair SC, Anoop KR. Local antimicrobial delivery of satranidazole loaded cross linked periodontal chips using bio degradable polymers. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2013;5(3):839-47.
20. Nair AS, Vidhya KM, Saranya TR, Sreelakshmy KR, Nair SC. Mucoadhesive buccal patch of cefixime trihydrate using biodegradable natural polymer. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2014;6(6):366-71.
Statistics
396 Views | 1295 Downloads
Citatons
How to Cite
Kumar, B. S., R. Krishna, L. Ps, D. T. Vasudev, and S. C. Nair. “FORMULATION AND EVALUATION OF NIOSOMAL SUSPENSION OF CEFIXIME”. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research, Vol. 10, no. 5, May 2017, pp. 194-01, doi:10.22159/ajpcr.2017.v10i5.17189.
Section
Original Article(s)