• Sreenivas Patro Sisinthy Taylors University
  • Nalamolu Koteswara Rao
  • Bhanoji Rao Me


Objectives: The tablets were prepared by wet granulation method using polyethylene oxide, which was used to prepare both the matrix core and
barrier layers. In vitro dissolution studies were carried out on the developed formulations. Based on the dissolution data, the best formulation was
chosen, and evaluated for its controlled release in healthy human volunteers.
Results: When the dissolution data was analyzed, IMP3L2 has shown the highest R
value (0.9866) with at least 80% of the drug released in 12 hrs
among all the formulations. Hence, the formulation IMP3L2 was chosen as an ideal formulation and selected for in vivo studies in human volunteers.
Eight healthy volunteers participated in the study, and a two-way crossover design was followed. The serum concentration of itopride hydrochloride
was estimated by reverse-phase high-performance liquid chromatography. The pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated from the serum
concentration of itopride hydrochloride versus time data. The delayed T
, decreased K
, unaltered bioavailability, and prolonged t
, indicated a slow
and prolonged release of itopride hydrochloride from polyethylene oxide layered matrix tablets in comparison with the plain matrix tablet.
Conclusion: Based on the results of in vitro and in vivo studies, it was concluded that polyethylene oxide based layered matrix tablets provided oral
controlled release of itopride hydrochloride.
Objective: In this study, layered matrix tablets of itopride hydrochloride were formulated using polyethylene oxide as release retardant to achieve
a zero order drug release. The objective of the study was to develop a formulation which will release at least 80% of the drug in 12 hrs and show a
correlation coefficient (R
) value of at least 0.95.
Keywords: Layered matrix tablets, Itopride hydrochloride, Polyethylene oxide, High-performance liquid chromatography, Serum.

Author Biography

Sreenivas Patro Sisinthy, Taylors University
Head, Department of Pharmaceutical Technology


1. Heller J. In: Robinson JR, Lee VH, editors. Controlled Drug Delivery:
Fundamentals and Applications. New York: Marcel Dekker; 1987.
p. 179.
2. Fan LT, Singh SK. Controlled Release, A Quantitative Treatment.
Berlin: Springer; 1989. p. 1.
3. Lee L. Diffusion-controlled matrix systems. In: Kydonieus A, editor.
Treatise on Controlled Drug Delivery. New York: Marcel Dekker;
1992. p. 155-98.
4. Narasimhan B, Langer R. Zero-order release of micro and
macromolecules from polymeric devices: The role of the burst effect.
J Control Release 2000;47:13-20.
5. Conte U, Maggi L. A flexible technology for the linear, pulsatile and
delayed release of drugs, allowing for easy accommodation of difficult
in vitro targets. J Control Release 2000;64(1-3):263-8.
6. Peppas NA, Sahlin JJ. A simple equation for the description of
solute release: III. Coupling of diffusion and relaxation. Int J Pharm
7. Chien YW. Fundamentals of controlled-release drug administration. In:
Swarbrick J, editor. Novel Drug Delivery System. New York, Basel:
Marcel Dekker; 1982. p. 465-574.
8. Higuchi T. Rate of release of medicaments from ointment bases
containing drugs in suspension. J Pharm Sci 1961;50(10):874-5.
9. Ritger PL, Peppas NA. A simple equation for the description of solute
release: I. Fickian and non-Fickian release from swellable devices
Asian J Pharm Clin Res, Vol 8, Issue 6, 2015, 130-135
Sisinthy et al.
in the form of slabs, spheres, cylinders or discs. J Control Release
10. Colombo P, Conte U, Gazzaniga A, Maggi L, Sangalli ME, Peppas NA,
et al. Drug release modulation by physical restrictions of matrix
swelling. Int J Pharm 1990;63:43-8.
11. Conte U, Maggi L, Colombo P, La Manna A. Multi-layered hydrophilic
matrices as constant release devices (Geomatrix® systems). J Control
Release 1993;26:39-47.
12. Kapoor V, Kapoor B, Gupta S. Itopride: A novel prokinetic agent. JK
Sci 2004;6(2):106-8.
13. Costa P, Sousa Lobo JM. Modelling and comparison of dissolution
profiles. Eur J Pharm Sci 2001;13(2):123-33.
14. Singh P, Desai SJ, Simonelli AP, Higuchi WI. Release rates of solid
drug mixtures dispersed in inert matrices. I. Noninteracting drug
mixtures. J Pharm Sci 1967;56(12):1542-7.
15. Higuchi T. Mechanism of sustained-action medication. Theoretical
analysis of rate of release of solid drugs dispersed in solid matrices.
J Pharm Sci 1963;52:1145-9.
16. Korsemeyer RW, Gurny R, Doelker EM, Buri P, Peppas NA.
Mechanism of solute release from porous hydrophilic polymers. Int J
Pharm 1983;15(1983):25-35.
17. Matthews BR. Regulatory aspects of stability testing in Europe. Drug
Dev Ind Pharm 1999;25(7):831-56.
18. Garvey JS, Cremer NE, Sussdorf DH. In: Methods of Immunology.
A Laboratory Text for Instruction and Research. 3
ed. New York: W A
Benjamin Inc.; 1977. p. 36-8.
19. Harland RS, Gazzaniga A, Sangalli ME, Colombo P, Peppas NA.
Drug/polymer matrix swelling and dissolution. Pharm Res
20. Yamoka K, Nakagowa T, Uno T. Statistical moments in
pharmacokinetics. J Pharm Sci 1978;6:547.
21. Chung M. Computation of model-independent pharmacokinetic
parameters during multiple dosing. J Pharm Sci 1984;73:570-1.
22. Qiu Y, Chidambaram N, Flood K. Design and evaluation of layered
diffusional matrices for zero-order sustained-release. J Control Release
23. Gibaldi M, Perrier D. Pharmacokinetics. 2
ed. New York: Marcel
Dekker; 1982. p. 182.
183 Views | 366 Downloads
How to Cite
Sisinthy, S. P., N. K. Rao, and B. R. Me. “CONTROLLED RELEASE LAYERED MATRIX TABLETS OF ITOPRIDE HYDROCHLORIDE: IN VITRO AND IN VIVO EVALUATION”. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research, Vol. 8, no. 6, Nov. 2015, pp. 130-5,
Original Article(s)