Effect of different types of surfactants on the physical properties and stability of carvedilol nano-niosomes

Taymouri, Somayeh; Varshosaz, Jaleh

Effect of different types of surfactants on the physical properties and stability of carvedilol nano-niosomes

Authors

Department of Pharmaceutics, School of Pharmacy and Novel Drug Delivery Systems Research Centre, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Background: Niosomes are non-ionic surfactant vesicles used as drug carriers for encapsulating both hydrophobic and hydrophilic drugs. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of different surfactants on the physical properties and stability of carvedilol niosomes designed to improve oral bioavailability.
Materials and Methods: Different niosomal formulations were prepared using a film hydration method, with various mixtures of different non-ionic surfactants including Span 20, 40, and 60, and also Tween 20, 40, and 60, along with cholesterol. The physicochemical characteristics of the formulations were evaluated in vitro.

Results: The drug encapsulation efficiency was reduced by using lauryl (C₁₂) chain containing surfactants, that is, Span/Tween. Cholesterol content and drug entrapment were the main factors affecting the mean particle size of the niosomes. The drug release profiles from most of the formulations were fitted well with the Baker-Lonsdale model, indicating a diffusion-based drug release mechanism. Niosomes prepared from 50 and 40% of the cholesterol with 25 or 30% of Span/Tween 60 showed the highest stability due to their high transition temperature and solid state feature of these surfactants.
Conclusions: From the results obtained, it may be concluded that nanoniosomes are promising stable carriers for the oral delivery of carvedilol.

Keywords

References

1.	Gaucher G, Satturwar P, Jones MC, Furtos A, Leroux JC. Polymeric micelles for oraldrug delivery. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 2010;76:147-58.
2.	Jadon PS, Gajbhiye V, Jadon RS, Gajbhiye KR, Ganesh N. Enhanced oral bioavailability of griseofulvin via niosomes. AAPS Pharm Sci Tech 2009;10:1186-92.
3.	Vishnu YV, Chandrasekhar K, Ramesh G, Rao YM. Development of mucoadhesive patches for buccal administration of carvedilol. Curr Drug Deliv 2007;4:27-39.
4.	Yamsani VV, Gannu R, Kolli C, Rao ME, Yamsani MR. Development and in vitro evaluation of buccoadhesive carvedilol tablets. Acta Pharm 2007;57:185-97.
5.	Venishetty VK, Chede R, Komuravelli R, Adepu L, Sistla R, Diwan PV. Design and evaluation of polymer coated carvedilol loaded solid lipid nanoparticles to improve the oral bioavailability: A novel strategy to avoid intraduodenal administration. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 2012;95:1-9.
6.	Sharma A, Jain CP. Preparation and characterization of solid dispersions of carvedilol with PVP K30. Res Pharm Sci 2010;5:49-56.
7.	Han HK, Shin HJ, Ha DH. Improved oral bioavailability of alendronate via the mucoadhesive liposomal delivery system. Eur J Pharm Sci 2012;46:500-7.
8.	Jain S, Patil SR, Swarnakar NK, Agrawal AK. Oral delivery of doxorubicin using novel polyelectrolyte-stabilized liposomes (layersomes). Mol Pharm 2012;9:2626-35.
9.	Kowapradit J, ApirakaramwongA, Ngawhirunpat T, Rojanarata T, Sajomsang W, Opanasopit P. Methylated N-(4-N, N-dimethylaminobenzyl) chitosan coated liposomes for oral protein drug delivery. Eur J Pharm Sci 2012;47:359-66.
10.	Rajera R, Nagpal K, Singh SK, Mishra DN. Niosomes: A controlled and novel drugdelivery system. Biol Pharm Bull 2011;34:945-53.
11.	Rentel CO, Bouwstra JA, Naisbett B, Junginger HE. Niosomes as a novel peroral vaccine delivery system. Int J Pharm 1999;186:161-7.
12.	Baillie AJ, Florence AT, Hume LR, Muirhead GT, Rogerson A. The preparation and properties of niosomes–non-ionic surfactant vesicles. J Pharm Pharmacol 1985;37:863-8. [PUBMED]
13.	Palozza P, Muzzalupo R, Trombino S, Valdannini A, Picci N. Solubilization and stabilization of beta-carotene in niosomes: Delivery to cultured cells. Chem Phys Lipids 2006;139:32-42.
14.	Varshosaz J, Pardakhty A, HajhashemiVI, Najafabadi AR. Development and physical characterization of sorbitan monoester niosomes for insulin oral delivery. Drug Deliv 2003;10:251-62.
15.	Moazeni E, Gilani K, Sotoudegan F, Pardakhty A, Najafabadi AR, Ghalandari R, et al. Formulation and in vitro evaluation of ciprofloxacin containing niosomes for pulmonary delivery. J Microencapsul 2010;27:618-27.
16.	Vangala A, Kirby D, Rosenkrands I, Agger EM, Andersen P, Perrie Y. A comparative study of cationic liposome and niosome-based adjuvant systems for protein subunit vaccines: Characterisation, environmental scanning electron microscopy and immunisation studies in mice. J Pharm Pharmacol 2006;58:787-99.
17.	Mokhtar M, Sammour OA, Hammad MA, Megrab NA. Effect of some formulation parameters on flurbiprofen encapsulation and release rates of niosomes prepared from proniosomes. Int J Pharm 2008;361:104-11.
18.	Khazaeli P, Pardakhty A, Shoorabi H. Caffeine-loaded niosomes: Characterization and in vitro release studies. Drug Deliv 2007;14:447-52.
19.	Uchegbu IF, Vyas SP. Non-ionic surfactant based vesicles (niosomes) in drug delivery. Int J Pharm 1998;172:33-70.

Advanced Biomedical Research