DESIGN AND EVALUATION OF BUCCAL PATCHES CONTAINING COMBINATION OF HYDROCHLOROTHIAZIDE AND ATENOLOL
Objective: Buccal patch is a non-dissolving thin matrix modified release dosage form which was developed to administer into the unconscious and less co-operative patients.
Methods: The mucoadhesive buccal patches of hydrochlorothiazide (HCZ) and atenolol (ATN) were prepared by solvent casting technique using various concentrations of sodium alginate, hydroxyl propyl methyl cellulose, carbopol 934P and sodium carboxy methyl cellulose polymer and polyvinyl alcohol as a backing layer. The formulated patches were evaluated for their physicochemical parameters like thickness, weight variation, surface pH, content uniformity, folding endurance, swelling percentage studies and tensile strength, in vitro and ex vivo drug permeation.
Results: The infra-red (IR) spectra showed no interaction between drug and polymer. Physicochemical characteristics of all the samples were found to be satisfactory and well within the range. Swelling of the films were increased with the increasing content of the polymers and it was found that swelling front erosion was comparably slower in the formulations with the carbopol 934 and HPMC. This is probably due to their marked viscous properties and therefore formulation provided sustained release of the drug. The percentage drug content of all the formulations were found to be in the range of 97-99 %. Among the patches, FC (Carbopol 934 and HPMC) patches were considered satisfactory for maintaining the in vitro residence in the oral cavity for almost 8h. Formulations FD (with CP and NaCMC) and FC showed high tensile strength and % E/B which is an indication of the strength and elasticity of the patch. The films were exhibited sustained release for more than 6 h which was confirmed by the in vitro release data and kinetic data reveals the combination of diffusion and erosion mechanism. The best mucoadhesive performance and matrix controlled release was exhibited by the formulation FC.Conclusion: The formulation of HCZ and ATN mucoadhesive buccal patch was found to be satisfactory and reasonable.
2. Patel VM, Prajapati BG, Patel MM. Design and characterization of chitosan containing mucoadhesive buccal patches of propranolol hydrochloride. Acta Pharm 2007;57:61-72.
3. Vashmi Vishnu Y, Chandrasekhar K, Ramesh G, Madhusudan Rao Y. Development of mucoadhesive patches for buccal administration of carvedilol. Curr Drug Delivery 2007;4:27-39.
4. Khairnar A, Jain P, Baviskar D, Jain D. Development of mucoadhesive buccal patch containing aceclofenac: in vitro evaluation. Int J Pharm Sci 2009;1:91-5.
5. Hao J, Heng PW. Buccal delivery systems. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 2003;29:821-32.
6. Pankil AG, Patel MR, Patel KR, Patel NM. A review article on mucoadhesive buccal drug delivery system. Int J Pharm Res Dev 2011;3:121-9.
7. Birudaraj R, Berner B, Shen S, Li X. Buccal permeation of busipirone: mechanistic studies on transport pathways. J Pharm Sci 2005;94:70-8.
8. Harris D, Robinson JR. Bioadhesive polymers in peptide drug delivery. Biomaterials 1990;11:652â€“8.
9. Kumar TP, Desai KG, Kumar SG. Mechanism of buccal permeation enhancers. Indian J Pharm Edu 2002;36:147-51.
10. Gandhi SD, Pandya PR, Umbarkar R, Tambawala T, Shah MA. Mucoadhesive drug delivery system-an unusual maneuver for site specific drug delivery system. Int J Pharm Sci 2011;14:851-72.
11. Angela A, Federica B, Teresa C, Federica C, Beatrice V, Barbara L. Mucoadhesive chitosan/gelatin films for buccal delivery of propranolol hydrochloride. Carb Pol 2011;29:821-32.
12. Patel KV, Patel ND, Dodiya HD, Shelat PK. Buccal bioadhesive drug delivery system: an overview. Indian J Pharm Biol Res 2011;2:600-9.
13. Satyabrata B, Ellaiah P, Choudhury R, Murthy KVR, Bibhutibhusan P, Kumar MS. Design and evaluation of methotrexate buccal mucoadhesive patches. Int J Pharm Biomed Sci 2010;1:31-6.
14. Patil BS, Tate SS, Kulkarni U, Hariprasanna RC, Wadageri GV. Development and in vitro evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal tablets of tizanidine hydrochloride using natural polymer Xanthan gum. Int J Pharm Sci Rev Res 2011;8:140-6.
15. Elk YR, Friedman M, Stabholz A, Soskolne AW, Sela MN, Golub L. Sustained release device containing minocycline for local treatment of periodontal disease. J Controlled Release 1998;7:231-6.
16. Ishida M, Nambu N, Nagai T. Mucosal dosage form of lidocaine for toothache using hydroxypropyl cellulose and carbopol. Chem Pharm Bull 1982;30:980-4.
17. Sadeq ZA, Rajab NA. Studying the effect of different varaiables on the formulation of mucoadhesive buccal patches of captopril. Int J Appl Pharm 2017;9:16-21.
18. Singh RK, Shah JN, Mehta TA. Mucoadhesive bilayer buccal patches of verapamil hydrochloride: formulation, development and characterization. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2014;6:234-2.
19. Das R. Effective mucoadhesive buccal patches: wound healing activity of curcumin and centella asiatica extract compared to rhEGF. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2011;3:97-100.
20. Rasool BKA, Khan SA. In vitro evaluation of miconazole buccal films. Int J Appl Pharm 2010;2:23-6.
21. Elbary AA, Makky AMA, Tadros MB, Ahmed AA. Development and in vitro evaluation of mucoadhesive bilayer buccal tablets of carvedilol. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2015;7:172-6.
22. Ritger PL, Peppa NA. A simple equation of solute release 1. Fickian and anamolous from swellable devices. J Controlled Release 1987;5:23-36.