DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION AND CHARACTERIZATION OF BUCCAL PATCHES CONTAINING ATENOLOL USING HYDROPHILIC POLYMERS

Authors

  • SURYA NARAYAN RATHA ADHIKARI Department of Pharmaceutics, Seemanta Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Mayurbhanj, Odisha, India https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3323-9312
  • SATYABRATA PANDA Kalinga Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Balasore, Odisha, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22159/ijap.2022v14i2.43589

Keywords:

Key words Tamarind seed polysaccharide, buccal patches, mucoadhesion, atenolol, ex vivo permeation.

Abstract

Objective: The present investigation focused on fabrication and evaluation of atenolol releasing buccal patches comprising mucoadhesive hydrophilic polymers like sodium alginate and tamarind seed polysaccharide with drug free backing layer (6 % ethyl cellulose).

Methods: Solvent evaporation technique being employed in the development of atenolol comprising buccal patches using mucoadhesive hydrophilic polymers. The prepared buccal patch formulations were tested for thickness, weight variation, folding endurance, drug content, moisture content, moisture absorption, % swelling, surface pH, in vitro residence time and mucoadhesion studies. The drug permeation through goat buccal mucosal membrane was conducted with the use of Franz diffusion cell in phosphate buffer saline, pH 6.8 and was subjected to FT-IR and SEM characterization. Stability study was performed as per ICH guidelines.

Results: For all the buccal patch formulations the average weight, thickness, drug content, moisture content, moisture absorption, % swelling, surface pH study exhibited satisfactory results. Out of 7 different buccal patches the formulation FA-1 revealed highest mucoadhesive strength (31.36±0.95 g), force of adhesion (0.31±0.04 N), maximum swelling index (341±0.83 %) and more than 24 h in vitro residence time. The buccal patch formulation FA-1 indicated highest drug permeation (97.51 %) in 24 h and was found to be stable. FT-IR examination confirms lack of drug polymer interaction. SEM investigation reveals smooth surface of the buccal patch.

Conclusion: The developed buccal patches comprising atenolol can be very promising in increasing patient compliance and reducing dosing frequency.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Saraswathi B, Balaji A, Umashankar MS. Polymers in mucoadhesive drug delivery system-latest updates. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci. 2013; 5(3): 423-30.

Phanindra B, Moorthy BK, Muthukumaran M. Recent advances in mucoadhesive/ bioadhesive drug delivery system: A Review. Int. J. Pharm. Med. & Bio. Sci. 2013; 2(1): 68-84.

Sheoran R. Buccal drug delivery system: A Review. Int. J. Pharm. Sci. Rev. Res. 2018; 50(1): 40-46.

Gawas SM., Dev A, Deshmukh G, Rathod S. Current approaches in buccal drug delivery system. Pharmaceutical and Biological Evaluations. 2016; 3 (2): 165-77.

Leela LV, Umashankar MS, Algusundaram M. An assessment on buccal mucoadhesive drug delivery system. Int J App Pharm. 2021; 13(6): 66-74. doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.22159/ijap.2021v13i6.42760.

Reddy RJ, Anjum M, Asif HM. A comprehensive review on buccal drug delivery system. American J Advanced Drug Delivery. 2013; 1(3): 300-12.

Patel AR, Patel DA, Chaudhry SV. Mucoadhesive buccal drug delivery system. Int J Pharm Life Sci. 2011; 2 (6): 848-56.

Gahlawat M. Formulation development and characterization of mucoadhesive patch of atenolol, Int.J Res Dev Pharm Life Sci. 2013; 3(1): 792-804.

Alekhya M, Swapna N, Asfia N, Rahmath S, Darshini D, Likhitha S, Jyothirmayee A, Sohail M, Rao MR, Prathiba G. Formulation and evaluation of bilayer buccal adhesive tablet containing atenolol. Asian J Pharm Res. 2014; 4(3): 160-69.

Pavani S, Goutham P. Formulation development and evaluation of taste masked oral disintegrating films of Atenolol. Innovat Int J Med Pharm Sci. 2017; 2 (2): 1-3.

Alekhya M, Swapna N, Asfia N, Rahmath S, Darshini D, Likhitha S, Jyothirmayee A, Sohail M, Rao MR, Prathiba G. Formulation and evaluation of bilayer buccal adhesive tablet containing atenolol. Asian J Pharm Res. 2014; 4(3): 160-69.

Havaldar VD, Kulkarni AS, Dias RJ, Aloorkar NH, Mali KK. Floating matrix tablets of atenolol: formulation and in vitro evaluation. Asian J Pharm 2009; October-December: 286-291. doi: 10.4103/0973-8398.59952.

Patel B, Patel P, Bhosale A, Hardikar S, Mutha S, Chaulang G. Evaluation of tamarind seed polysaccharide (tsp) as a mucoadhesive and sustained release component of nifedipine buccoadhesive tablet & comparison with HPMC and Na CMC. Int J Pharm Tech Res. 2009; 1(3): 404-10.

Mahavarkar RV, Ahirrao S, Kshirsagar S, Rayate V. Formulation and evaluation of tamarind seed polysaccharide matrix tablet. Pharm Biol Eval. 2016; 3(2): 241-55.

Manchanda R, Arora SC, Manchanda R: Tamarind seed polysaccharide and its modifications –versatile pharmaceutical excipients- A review. Int J of Pharm Tech Res. 2014; 6(2): 412-20.

Saikia T, Ali J, Das B. Isolation and charecterization of tamarind seed polysaccharides–a natural release retardant. Int J Curr Pharm Res. 2017; 9 (4): 114-17.

Kumar R, Patil SR, Patil MB, Paschapur MS, Mahalaxmi R. Isolation and evaluation of the emulsifying properties of tamarind seed polysaccharide on castor oil emulsion. Der Pharmacia Lettre 2010; 2(1): 518-27.

Satishbabu BK., Srinivasan BP. Preparation and evaluation of buccoadhesive films of atenolol. Indian J Pharm Sci. 2008; 70(2): 175-79. doi: 10.4103/0250-474X.41451, PMID 20046708.

Attama A, Akpa PA, Onugwu LE, Igwilo G. Novel buccoadhesive delivery system of hydrochlorothiazide formulated with ethyl cellulose, hydroxy propyl methylcellulose interpolymer complex. Sci Res Essay. 2008; 3(6): 26–33.

Gupta A, Garg S, Khar RK. Measurement of bioadhesion strength of muco-adhesive buccal tablet: design of an in vitro assembly. Indian Drugs. 1992; 30:152–55.

Rao NGR, Kulkarni GS. Formulation and evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal bilayered tablets of salbutamol. Int J Drug Dev Res. 2012; 4(4): 375-84.

Saxena A, Tewari G, Awasthi GS: Formulation and evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal patch of acyclovir utilizing inclusion phenomenon. Brazilian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 2011; 47(4): 887-897.

Neeraja P, Devi PU, Sandhya V, Shanjana M, Umool VS, Deshpande S. Preparation and evaluation of paracetomol mucoadhesive buccal patches using tamarind seed polysaccharide as a natural binder. Int J Pharm Sci Res. 2017; 8(5): 2282-86.

doi: 10.13040/IJPSR.0975-8232.8(5).2282-86.

Nafee NA, Boraie NA, Ismail FA, Mortada LM: Design and characterization of mucoadhesive buccal patches containing cetylpyridinium chloride. Acta Pharm. 2003; 53: 199-212.

Rana AH, Ranan MO, Sweidan K, Yusuf AH. Formulation and in vitro evaluation of xanthan gum or carbopol 934-based mucoadhesive patches, loaded with nicotine. AAPS Pharm Sci Tech. 2011; 12 (1): 21–27.

doi: 10.1208/s12249-010-9534-5.

Reddy ND, Srinath MS, Azad HA, Srinivasalu R, Sravanti M. Studies on formulation and evaluation of glipizide and precoxib combination mucoadhesive tablets. Int J Res Ayur Pharm. 2011; 2 (2): 526-30.

Semalty M, Semalty A., Kumar G. Formulation and characterization of mucoadhesive buccal films of glipizide. Indian J Pharm Sci. 2008; 70(1): 43-48.

doi: 10.4103/0250-474X.40330.

Swamy PV, Amitkumar T, Shirsand SB., Patil AN, Farhana L. Design and evaluation of buccal patches of granisetron hydrochloride. Indian J Pharm Educ Res. 2010; 44(1): 95-101.

Pandey S. Formulation and evaluation of buccal patches of diclofenac sodium. Int J Sci Eng Res. 2012; 3(12): 1-7.

Kumar V, Zakir F, Agarwal G, Choudhary A: Formulation and evaluation of buccal patches of venlafaxine. Int J Pharm Bioll Sci. 2011; 1(3): 170-82.

Patil JS, Rao KP. Design and evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal patches of diuclofenac sodium. Indian J Pharm Sci. 2003: 420-22.

Reddy J. Kumar R, Muzib IY, Chowdary KPR. Formulation and evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal films of amiloride hydrochloride. J Global Trends Pharm Sci. 2012; 3 (3): 828-35.

Shivhare UD, Bodkhe PD, Bhusari KP, Mathur VB. Formulation and evaluation of buccoadhesive films of losartan potassium. Der Pharmacia Lettre. 2010; 2(5): 251-60.

Verma N, Chattopadhyay P. Preparation of mucoadhesive patches for buccal administration of metoprolol succinate: in vitro and in vivo drug release and bioadhesion. Trop J Pharm Res. 2012; 11(1): 9-17. doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v11i1.2.

Panicker PS, Sivakumar V. Measurement of bioadhesive strength of mucoadhesive buccal patches: design of an in vitro assembly. Int J Pharm Ph Analysis. 2016; 2(1): 1-6. 36. Gupta A, Garg S, Khar RK: Measurement of bioadhesion strength of muco-adhesive buccal tablet: design of an in vitro assembly. Indian Drugs. 1992; 30: 152–55.

Doshi A, Koliyote S, Joshi B. Design and evaluation of buccal film of diclofenac sodium. Int J Pharm Bio Sci. 2011; 1(1): 17-30.

Khanna B, Kumar K. Preparation and in vitro assessment of mucoadhesive buccal patches of lorazepam. Int J Pharm Innovations. 2011: 1(5): 1-8.

Mishra S, Kumar G., Kothiyal P.: Formulation and evaluation of buccal patches of simvastatin by using different polymers. The Pharma Innovation. 2012; 1(7): 87-92.

Semalty A, Semalty M, Nautiyal U: Formulation and evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal films of enalapril maleate. Indian J Pharm Sci. 2010; 72 (5): 571-75.

doi: 10.4103/0250-474X.78522.

Kshirasagar N, Kthamada N, Naik VN, Balaji K, Gopal MS. Design and evaluation of chitosan containing mucoadhesive buccal patch of fluxotine hcl. Int J Sci Res Publications. 2012; 2 (6): 1-5.

Patel VM, Prajapati BG, Patel MM: Design and characterization of chitosan-containing mucoadhesive buccal patches of propranolol hydrochloride. Acta Pharm. 2007; 57: 61–72.

Khairnar A, Jain P, Baviskar D, Jain D. Developmement of mucoadhesive buccal patch containing aceclofenac: in vitro evaluations. Int J Pharm Tech Res. 2009; 1 (4): 978-81.

Bose PSC, Damineni S, Ravouru N. Formulation and evaluation of verapamil hydrochloride transmucosal drug delivery system. Thai J Pharm Sci. 2013; 37: 25-38.

Zafar N, Neeharika V, Lakshmi PK. Formulation and evaluation of sildenafil citrate fast dissolving tablets using fenugreek seed mucilage. Int J Res Ayurveda Pharm. 2014; 5 (3): 352-58.

Deshmane SV, Channnawar MA, Chandewar AV, Joshi UM, Biyani KR. Chitosan based sustained release mucoadhesivev buccal patches containing verapamil Hcl. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci. 2009; 1(1): 216-219.

Bingi M, Gudas GK, Sravanthi NR. Madhuri A, Lavanya Y. Formulation and evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal patches of resperidone. J Chem Pharm Res. 2010; 2(4): 866-72.

Patel D, Mohan S, Parmar D, Chaudhary S. Formulation and evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal films of esomoprazole magnesium trihydrate. Ind J Pharm Ed Res. 2013; 47 (3):70-76.

Ammanage A, Rodriques P, Kempwade A, Hiremath R. Formulation and evaluation of buccal films of piroxicam co crystals. Future J Pharm Sci. 2020; 6 (16): 1-11.

Hussain MA, Rao TR, Nusrath A, Maimuna A, Rahman MA. Design and evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal patches of Venlafaxine. British J Pharm Res. 2015; 6 (2): 96-106.

Reddy J. Kumar R, Muzib IY, Chowdary KPR. Formulation and evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal films of amiloride hydrochloride. J Global Trends Pharm Sci. 2012; 3 (3): 828-35.

Verma N, Wahi AK, Verma A, Chattopadhayay P: Evaluation of a mucoadhesive buccal patch for delivery of Atenolol. in vitro screening of bioadhesion. J Pure Appl Microbiol. 2007; 1: 115-18.

Roda A, Prabhu P, Dubey A. Design and evaluation of buccal patches containing combination of hydrochlorothiazide and atenolol. Int J App Pharm. 2018; 10 (2): 105-12.

Published

14-01-2022

How to Cite

RATHA ADHIKARI, S. N., & PANDA, S. (2022). DEVELOPMENT EVALUATION AND CHARACTERIZATION OF BUCCAL PATCHES CONTAINING ATENOLOL USING HYDROPHILIC POLYMERS. International Journal of Applied Pharmaceutics, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.22159/ijap.2022v14i2.43589

Issue

Section

Original Article(s)