Past Decade Attempts on Gastro Retentive Microspheres Using Factorial Design: A Comprehensive Literature
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Phytopharmacological Research (eIJPPR) | April 2021 | Volume 11 | Issue 2 | Page 24-30
Sowjanya Hatthi Belgal Mundarinti, Past Decade Attempts on Gastro Retentive Microspheres Using Factorial Design: A Comprehensive
Literature
Past Decade Attempts on Gastro Retentive
Microspheres Using Factorial Design: A
Comprehensive Literature
Sowjanya Hatthi Belgal Mundarinti1, Hindustan Abdul Ahad2*
1
Department of Pharmaceutics, Research Scholar, JNTUA, Ananthapuramu-515001, Andhra Pradesh, India.
2
Department of Industrial Pharmacy, Raghavendra Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (RIPER)-
Autonomous, K. R. Palli Cross, Ananthapuramu-515721, Andhra Pradesh, India.
ABSTRACT
The main intention of floating microspheres is to elevate gastro-retentive time, there by drug release and
bioavailability. Floating drug delivery systems glide on gastric fluid for an extended time without leaving the
stomach and give good accessibility of the drug systemically and good duration of action for the prolonged
period of time. Gastro-retentive microspheres are preferred for local action, local absorption, and preventing
drug deterioration at the stomach. This article was made by pearly referring to published research papers of
both online and offline journals on gastro retentive microspheres made by factorial design. The authors
succeeded in collecting the information about the past decade of work done on gastro retentive drug delivery
systems using factorial design. The authors from this study conclude that factorial design is an appreciable
technique in the optimization of the gastro retentive dosage form in the form off microspheres for the drug
delivery for the extended period of time.
Key Words: Stomach, Target, Dosage form, Drug release.
eIJPPR 2021; 11(2):24-30
HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE: Mundarinti S.H.B, Abdul Ahad H. Past Decade Attempts on Gastro Retentive Microspheres Using
Factorial Design: A Comprehensive Literature. . Int. J. Pharm. Phytopharmacol. Res. 2021;11(2):24-30. https://doi.org/
periods and retain a steady concentration of medication in
INTRODUCTION the serum. In the gastric area, the gastroprotective dosage
type may last for few hours and thus significantly increase
The oral route is harmless and real for decades for drug the drug GRT to improve bioavailability, minimize drug
delivery [1, 2]. The drug liberates by this traditional oral waste and improve the solubility of drugs with low
route has fluctuation in the sum of medication reaching solubility. Floating microspheres are empty spherical
the blood with time as it has to pass different pH zones of particles deprived of a centre, in a stringent sense with
the gut [3]. Novel approaches were made to solve this free-flowing particles [8] oscillating in size from 1 to
issue, among them gastro retentive systems gaining 1000μm.
importance from researchers and formulation
development scientists [4, 5]. Among the gastro, retentive Types of Gastro Retentive Dosage Forms
systems microspheres are preferred for their ease in the
making, flow properties (easy to fill in hard gelatin Floating tablets
capsules). Floating drug delivery is intended to hold the These are low-density tablets which buoyant at the upper
drug in the stomach. Drugs with shorter half-lives that are part of the stomach owing to their low density. These may
readily absorbed in GIT are highly detached from the be Effervescent floating tablets were made with swellable
circulation of the serum [6, 7]. To resolve these polymers and diverse effervescent compounds
difficulties, the oral managed drug delivery mechanism (combination of citric acid/tartaric acid with Sodium
has risen as they liberate the drug into the GIT for longer bicarbonate). When these tablets contact with the gastric
Corresponding author: Hindustan Abdul Ahad
Address: Department of Industrial Pharmacy, Raghavendra Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (RIPER)-Autonomous, K. R.
Palli Cross, Ananthapuramu-515721, Andhra Pradesh, India.
E-mail: abdulhindustan @ gmail.com
Received: 11 January 2021; Revised: 20 March 2021; Accepted: 29 March 2021
ISSN (Online) 2249-6084 (Print) 2250-1029 www.eijppr.comInternational Journal of Pharmaceutical and Phytopharmacological Research (eIJPPR) | April 2021 | Volume 11 | Issue 2 | Page 24-30 Sowjanya Hatthi Belgal Mundarinti, Past Decade Attempts on Gastro Retentive Microspheres Using Factorial Design: A Comprehensive Literature fluid liberates CO2 that is captured in a swollen polymer Gastro-Retentive Microspheres that buoyant in gastric fluid. On the otherhand, the Non- These delivery systems were retained in the stomach by effervescent systems, which contain swellable polymers, the mechanism of low density/high density/gas on swelling their density attains
International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Phytopharmacological Research (eIJPPR) | April 2021 | Volume 11 | Issue 2 | Page 24-30
Sowjanya Hatthi Belgal Mundarinti, Past Decade Attempts on Gastro Retentive Microspheres Using Factorial Design: A Comprehensive
Literature
factors, it likewise permits the effects of controlling a [25]. Independent and dependant variables adopted in
solitary variable to be detached and dissected separately recent years as explained in Table 1.
Table 1. Drug and polymers used in making gastro retentive microspheres by factorial design
Drug Polymer/ main excipient Design Independent Variable Dependant Variable Reference
Hydroxypropyl %yield (Y1), Entrapment
Stirring speed
methylcellulose (HPMC), efficiency (EE) (Y2), In-vitro Patel et al.,
Repaglinide 32 FFD (X1), The concentration of
Polyethylene glycol 400, Buoyancy (Y3), and %Drug 2020 [26]
Polymer Ratio (X2)
and Ethyl Cellulose (EC) release (DR) (Y4)
Carbopol 974P, Sodium Stirring speed Drug content (Y1), EE (Y2),
Deshmukh et
Olanzepine Alginate and Calcium 32 FFD (X1) and Concentration of % mucoadhesion (MA) (Y3)
al., 2020 [27]
chloride (Ca Cl2) Polymer (X2) and in vitro DR (Y4)
The concentration of Sodium %yield (Y1), EE (Y2),
Sodium alginate, carbopol alginate (X1) and the Particle size (PS) (Y3), Paul et al.,
Metronidazole 32 FFD
934P, and Ca Cl2 Concentration of Polymer Swelling index (SI) (Y4), 2019 [28]
Carbopol 934P (X2) %MA (Y5), and DR (Y6)
Box
Amount of EC (X1), Amount EE (Y1), DR at 1h (Q1h)
Behnken Lal et al.,
Valsartan Carbopol 934P and EC of carbopol 934P (X2), and (Y2), t90% (Y3), and %MA
Design 2019 [29]
Stirring speed (X3) (Y4)
(BBD)
Metoprolol EC concentration (X1) and Bhavani et al.,
EC 23 FFD EE (Y1) and PS (Y2)
tartrate Stirring speed (X2) 2019 [30]
Eudragit RS or RL (X1) and PS (Y1), EE (Y2), MA (Y3),
Eudragit RS, Eudragit RL Singh et al.,
Cinnarizine 32 FFD Iron oxide (X2) zeta potential (Y4), and t90%
and Iron oxide 2017 [31]
Concentrations (Y5)
26
Amount of Polymer (X1) and EE (Y1), % MA (Y2), and % Deshmukh et
Fluoxetine HCl Chitosan 32 FFD
Speed (X2) DR (Y3) al., 2017 [32]
% yield (Y1),
The total amount of polymer
Cefditoren PS (Y2), Chilukala et
HPMC K4M and EC 32 FFD (X1) and Concentration of EC
pivoxel EE (Y3) and Dissolution al., 2016 [33]
(X2)
efficiency (Y4)
Polymer Concentration (X1),
Emulsifying agent Hardenia et
Amoxicillin Carbopol 934 and EC 33 FFD EE (Y1) and PS (Y2)
concentration (X2), and the al., 2016 [34]
stirring speed (X3)
Polymer amount
Eudragit S100 and Sodium
(X1), Surfactant concentration Rai et al.,
Clotrimazole carboxymethyl cellulose (Na BBD PS (Y1) and EE (Y2)
(X2) and Stirring speed 2016 [35]
CMC)
(X3)
Sodium alginate, Na CMC, Polymer concentration (X1) Thulluru et
EE (Y1), % MA (Y2), and in
Cimetidine Xanthan gum, and Gum 32 FFD and Sodium alginate al., 2016 [36]
vitro DR (Y3)
Kondagogu concentration (X2)
Amount of Psyllium husk(X1)
Tandel et al.,
Sigagliptin HPMC and PVP K30 32 FFD and Amount of HPMC In vitro DR (Y1) and SI (Y2)
2016 [37]
K4M(X2)
Polymer concentration (X1)
Sodium alginate, Chitosan EE (Y1), %MA (Y2), DR Kumar et al.,
Furosemide 22FFD and Sodium alginate
and Ca Cl2 (Y3) and SI (Y4) 2016 [38]
concentration (X2)
Amount of polymer (X1), Feed Shah 2015
Chitosan and
Prochlorperazine 23 FFD flow rate (X2), and Volume of PS (Y1) and EE (Y2) [39]
Glutaraldehyde
Glutaraldehyde (X3)
ISSN (Online) 2249-6084 (Print) 2250-1029 www.eijppr.comInternational Journal of Pharmaceutical and Phytopharmacological Research (eIJPPR) | April 2021 | Volume 11 | Issue 2 | Page 24-30
Sowjanya Hatthi Belgal Mundarinti, Past Decade Attempts on Gastro Retentive Microspheres Using Factorial Design: A Comprehensive
Literature
The amount of Drug: Polymer
ratio (X1) and the amount of EE (Y1), drug loading (Y2), Anand et al.,
Praziquantel Sodium alginate and Ca Cl2 23 FFD
Ca Cl2 (X2) and dropping and PS (Y3) 2014 [40]
height (X3)
Gum Karaya in % (X1),
Sodium Tripoly Phosphate SI (Y1), %yield (Y2), Drug
Sodium Tripoly Acetic Acid Chandiran et
Cefdinir and Gum Karaya, Acetic 23 FFD content (Y3),
Phosphate in % (X2) al., 2014 [41]
acid EE (Y4) and n-Vitro DR (Y5)
The acetic acid in % (X3)
PS (Y1), SI (Y2), EE (Y3),
Stirring speed (X1) and Awasthi et al.,
Ranitidine HCl Chitosan 32 FFD %MA (Y4) and in Vitro DR
Polymer-to-Drug ratio (X2) 2014 [42]
(Y5)
Drug: polymer ratio (X1),
Surfactant concentration % EE (Y1), %DR after 6 h (Y2) Abdallah et
Acetazolamide Eudragit RS100 BBD
(X2), and Stirring rate (rpm) and PS (Y3) al., 2014 [43]
(X3)
Setia et al.,
Chitosan and Eudragit L- Polymer-to-drug ratio (X1) PS (Y1), EE (Y2), SI, %MA
Duloxetine HCl 32 FFD 2013 [44]
100 and Stirring speed (X2) and DR up to 24 h (t24) (Y3)
The concentration of EC (X1) EE (Y1), %DR at 10th h (Y2) Nila et al.,
Carvedilol EC and HPMC 32 FFD
and Stirring speed (X2) and PS (Y3) 2013 [45]
Dioctyl sodium EE (Y1), SI (Y2), % MA
Cefpodoxime Drug polymer ratio (X1) and Nappinai et
sulphosuccinate and 32 FFD (Y3) and Time for 50% drug
proxetil Glutaraldehyde (X2) al., 2013 [46]
Chitosan dissolution (t50) (Y4)
T50% (Y1), T80% (Y2), release
The total amount of polymer Gandhi et al.,
Captopril EC and Eudragit RL 100 32 FFD at 12 h (Y2), release at 18 h
(X1) and % of EC (X2) 2012 [47]
(Y3), and K of 1st order (Y4) 27
Polymer-to-drug ratio (X1) Senthil et al.,
Venlaflaxine EC, HPMC %yield (Y1), PS (Y2), and
23 FFD and Stirring speed 2011 [48]
HCl K4M and Eudragit RS100 EE (Y3)
(X2)
Carbopol 934P, Eudragit
Drug to polymer ratio (Y1) %MA (Y1), EE (Y2), and In- Natarajan et
Atenolol RL100, Span 80, Ethanol, 32 FFD
and drug to Polymer ratio (Y2) vitro DR (Y3) al., 2011 [49]
and Petroleum ether
The ratio of Gelucire 43/01 to Buoyancy lag time (Y1), DR
HPMC K4M and Gelucire Patel et al.,
Famotidine 32 FFD HPMC K4M (X1) and the type at 1h (Q1) (Y2), 6h (Q6) (Y3),
43/01 2011 [50]
of filler (X2) and the 12h (Q12) (Y4)
Eudragit concentration (X1),
Eudragit RL100 and EE (Y1) and in-vitro DR Dehghan et
Nifedipine 23 FFD PVA concentration (X2), and
Polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) (Y2) al., 2010 [51]
drug/polymer ratio (X3)
Drug-to-polymer-to-polymer %MA (Y1), EE (Y2), PS
Patel et al.,
Propranolol HCl Carbopol-934P and EC 32 FFD (X1) and the Stirring speed (Y3), and the time required
2010 [52]
(X2) for 80 % DR (Y4)
Amount of Psyllium husk(X1)
HPMC K4M and Psyllium DR 50% (t50%) (Y1) and DR Kharia et al.,
Acyclovir 32FFD and Amount of HPMC
husk 70% (t70%) (Y2) 2010 [53]
K4M(X2)
Rosiglitazone The concentration of EC (X1) EE (Y1), %DR after 8 h (Y2) Rao et al.,
EC and HPMC K100M 32 FFD
maleate and Stirring speed (X2) and PS (Y3) 2009 [54]
CONCLUSION diverse levels of the other factor could yield
determinations over a scope of conditions for the trial.
The factorial plan is more creative than the 1-factor A
factorial plan is essential, when connections are available, Acknowledgments: None
to evade a deceptive end. Assessment of one factor at
Conflict of interest: None
ISSN (Online) 2249-6084 (Print) 2250-1029 www.eijppr.comInternational Journal of Pharmaceutical and Phytopharmacological Research (eIJPPR) | April 2021 | Volume 11 | Issue 2 | Page 24-30
Sowjanya Hatthi Belgal Mundarinti, Past Decade Attempts on Gastro Retentive Microspheres Using Factorial Design: A Comprehensive
Literature
Financial support: None through floating microspheres: A Review. Res J
Pharm Dosage Forms Technol. 2012;4(3): II.
Ethics statement: None [12] Deepa M, Karthikeyan M. Cefpodoxime proxetil
floating microspheres: formulation and in vitro
REFERENCES evaluation. Iran J Pharm Sci. 2009:5(2):69-72.
[13] Kaurav H, HariKumar S, Kaur A. Mucoadhesive
[1] Ashjaran A, Sheybani S. Drug Release of Bacterial microspheres as carriers in drug delivery: a review.
Cellulose as Antibacterial Nano Wound Dressing. Int Int J Drug Dev Res. 2012;4(2):21-34.
J Pharm Res Allied Sci. 2019 Jul 1;8(3):137-43. [14] Shravani Y, Ahad HA, Haranath C, Gari Poojitha B,
[2] Al Zahrani S, Eid Alosaimi M, Alamrim AA, Rahamathulla S, Rupasree A. Past Decade Work
Alotaibi M, Almatar EA, Almanea BA. Association Done On Cubosomes Using Factorial Design: A Fast
between knowledge and drug adherence in patients Track Information for Researchers. Int J Life Sci
with hypertension in Saudi Arabia. Arch Pharm Pharma Res. 2021;11(1):124-35.
Pract. 2019 Jul 1;10(3):71-6. [15] Balamurugan M, Saravanan V, Ganesh P, Senthil S,
[3] De Souza MP, Sábio RM, de Cassia Ribeiro T, Dos Hemalatha P, Pandya S. Development and in-vitro
Santos AM, Meneguin AB, Chorilli M. Highlighting evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal tablets of
the impact of chitosan on the development of domperidone. Res J Pharm Technol. 2008;1(4):377-
gastroretentive drug delivery systems. Int J Biol 80.
Macromol. 2020 Sep 15;159:804-22. [16] Hussain MM, Nappinai M. Development and method
[4] Li Z, Zeng R, Yang L, Ren X, Maffucci KG, Qu Y. validation of an unconventional in-vitro test to
Development and Characterization of PCL measure mucoadhesive strength of tablets. Res J
Electrospun Membrane-Coated Bletilla striata Pharm Technol. 2009 Jun 28;2(2):363-5.
Polysaccharide-Based Gastroretentive Drug Delivery [17] Ahad HA, Haranath C, Rahul Raghav D, Gowthami
System. AAPS Pharm Sci Tech. 2020 Feb;21(2):1-4. M, Naga Jyothi V, Sravanthi P. Overview on Recent
[5] Lopes CM, Bettencourt C, Rossi A, Buttini F, Barata Optimization Techniques in Gastro Retentive
P. Overview on gastroretentive drug delivery systems Microcapsules by Factorial Design. Int J Pharm Sci
for improving drug bioavailability. Int J Pharm. Res. 2019;10(9):247-54. 28
2016;510(1):144-58. [18] Verma M, Bhatnagar S, Kumari K, Mittal N,
[6] Ahad HA, Haranath C, Rahul Raghav D, Gowthami Sukhralia S, At SG, et al. Highly conserved epitopes
M, Naga Jyothi V, Sravanthi P. Overview on Recent of DENV structural and non-structural proteins:
Optimization Techniques in Gastro Retentive Candidates for universal vaccine targets. Gene.
Microcapsules by Factorial Design. Int J Pharm Sci 2019;695:18-25.
Res. 2019;10(9):247-54. [19] Jain SK, Awasthi A, Jain N, Agrawal G. Calcium
[7] Harsha SS, Ahad HA, Haranath C, Dasari RR, silicate-based microspheres of repaglinide for
Gowthami M, Varam NJ, et al. Exfoliation gastroretentive floating drug delivery: Preparation
Technique of Composing and Depictions of and in vitro characterization. J Control Release.
Clopidogrel Bisulphate Afloat Microspheres. J Evol 2005;107(2):300-9.
of Med Dent Sci. 2020, 9(14):1156-61. [20] Talukder R, Fassihi R. Gastroretentive delivery
[8] Chinthaginjala H, Gandla CB, Challa MR, systems: hollow beads. Drug Dev Ind Pharm.
Pradeepkumar B, Ahad HA. Formulation and in vitro 2004;30(4):405-12.
Evaluation of Floating Tablets of Dicloxacillin [21] Liu Y, Zhang J, Gao Y, Zhu J. Preparation and
Sodium Using Different Polymers. J Young Pharm. evaluation of glyceryl monooleate-coated hollow-
2019;11(3):247. bioadhesive microspheres for gastroretentive drug
[9] Li Q, Guan X, Cui M, Zhu Z, Chen K, Wen H, et al. delivery. Int J Pharm. 2011 Jul 15;413(1-2):103-9.
Preparation and investigation of novel gastro-floating [22] Garg R, Gupta G. Gastroretentive floating
tablets with 3D extrusion-based printing. Int J Pharm. microspheres of silymarin: preparation and in vitro
2018;535(1-2):325-32. evaluation. Trop J Pharm Res. 2010;9(1):59-66.
[10] Rawat S, Sangali S, Gupta A. Formulation and [23] Chinthaginjala H, Ahad HA, Samhitharao B,
Evaluation of Floating Matrix Tablets of Acyclovir Yasaswini VS, Madana G, Varam NJ, et al.
using 3 2 Factorial Design. Res J Pharm Dosage Formulation and in vitro evaluation of fast
Forms Technol. 2018;10(1):1-9. disintegrating tablets of an anti-inflammatory drug
[11] Faizi SM, Rathi PN, Tajane SV, Burghate RM, using natural super disintegrating agents..(2). Int J
Wasankar SR. Drug delivery to absorption window Life Sci Pharma Res. 2021;11(2):9-18.
ISSN (Online) 2249-6084 (Print) 2250-1029 www.eijppr.comInternational Journal of Pharmaceutical and Phytopharmacological Research (eIJPPR) | April 2021 | Volume 11 | Issue 2 | Page 24-30
Sowjanya Hatthi Belgal Mundarinti, Past Decade Attempts on Gastro Retentive Microspheres Using Factorial Design: A Comprehensive
Literature
[24] Abdul AH, Bala AG, Chintaginjala H, Manchikanti [36] Thulluru A, Varma MM, Setty CM, Anusha A,
SP, Kamsali AK, Dasari RR. Equator Assessment of Chamundeeswari P, Sanufar S. Formulation, in vitro
Nanoparticles Using the Design-Expert Software. Int and in vivo evaluation of pioglitazone hydrochloride–
J Pharm Sci Nanotechnol. 2020 Jan 31;13(1):4766- effervescent gastro retentive floating hydrophilic
72. matrix tablets. Int J Pharmtech Res. 2016;9(7):388-
[25] Nandare DS, Mandlik SK, Khiste SK, Mohite YD. 98.
Formulation and Optimization of Mouth dissolving [37] Tandel H, Bhatt P, Jain K, Shahiwala A, Misra A. In-
tablets of Olanzapine by using 32 Factorial Design. vitro and in-vivo tools in emerging drug delivery
Magnesium. 2011 Aug 28;1200:45. scenario: Challenges and updates. In-vitro and in-
[26] Patel AK, Mishra MK, Gupta J, Ghoshal S, Gupta R, vivo tools in drug delivery research for optimum
Kushwaha K. Guar Gum-Based Floating clinical outcomes. 2018 Jun 22:19-42.
Microspheres of Repaglinide Using 32 Factorial [38] Kumar S, Nanda A. Formulation optimization and in
Design: Fabrication, Optimization, Characterization, vitro evaluation of gastroretentive mucoadhesive
and In Vivo Buoyancy Behavior in Albino Rats. microspheres of Furosemide. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci.
Assay Drug Dev Technol. 2021 Mar 1;19(2):63-74. 2016;8(7):392-8.
[27] Deshmukh MT, Mohite SK. Formulation & [39] Shah SS. Preparation and evaluation of spray-dried
characterization of olanzepine-loaded mucoadhesive mucoadhesive microspheres for intranasal delivery of
microspheres. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. prochlorperazine using factorial design. Asian J
2017;10(4):41-2. Pharm (AJP). 2015 Jul 15;9(3):178-89.
[28] Paul B, Adimoolam S, Javed Qureshi M. [40] Anand N. Nano medicines and Drug Delivery,
Development and Evaluation of Amoxicillin Loaded Research & Reviews. J Pharm Nanotechnol.
Carbopol 934P Mucoadhesive Microcapsules for 2014;4(2):1-6.
Sustained Drug Release for H. pylori Treatment. Iran [41] Chandiran S, Kumar BP, Narayan V. Formulation
J Pharm Sci. 2019 Jul 1;15(3):61-80. and in vitro evaluation of floating drug delivery
[29] Lal C, Garg R, Gupta GD. Formulation and system for salbutamol sulphate. Int J Pharma Biomed
optimization of mucoadhesive microspheres of Sci. 2010 Jun;1(1):12-5.
valsartan by using box-behnken design. Int J Appl [42] Awasthi R. Preparation, characterization and 29
Pharm. 2019;11(4):371-9. evaluation of ranitidine hydrochloride-loaded
[30] Bhavani J, Saloni S, Rajeshri D. Formulation and mucoadhesive microspheres. Polim Med.
evaluation of floating microspheres using factorial 2014;44(2):75-81.
design. Int J Recent Sci Res. 2019;10(12):36363-370. [43] Abedullahh MH. Box-behnken design for
[31] Singh I, Kamboj S, Rana V. Quality by Design Based development and optimization of acetazolamide
Fabrication of Iron Oxide Induced Mucoadhesive microspheres. India. 2014;5(4):1228-39.
Microspheres for Enhanced Bioavalibility of [44] Setia A, Kansal S, Goyal N. Development and
Cinnarizine. Curr Drug Deliv. 2017 Dec optimization of enteric coated mucoadhesive
1;14(8):1154-69. microspheres of duloxetine hydrochloride using 32
[32] Deshmukh MT, Mohite SK. Preparation and full factorial design. Int J Pharm Investig. 2013
evaluation of mucoadhesive microsphere of Jul;3(3):141-50.
fluoxetine Hcl. Int J Pharm Sci Res. 2017 Sep [45] Nila MV, Sudhir MR, Cinu TA, Aleykutty NA, Jose
1;8(9):3776-85. S. Floating microspheres of carvedilol as gastro
[33] Chilukala S. Formulation Development of Floating retentive drug delivery system: 32 full factorial
Microspheres of Cefditoren Pivoxel by 32 Factorial design and in vitro evaluation. Drug Deliv. 2014 Mar
Design and in Vitro Characterization. Asian J Pharm. 1;21(2):110-7.
2016 Apr 2;10(1):S14-S22. [46] Nappinnai M, Sivaneswari S. Formulation
[34] Hardenia A, Gupta AK, Singh RP. In Vitro and in optimization and characterization of gastroretentive
Vivo evaluation of mucoadhesive microspheres for cefpodoxime proxetil mucoadhesive microspheres
treatment of helicobacter pylori using factorial using 32 factorial design. J Pharm Res. 2013 Apr
design. J Drug Deliv Ther. 2017;7(7):65-8. 1;7(4):304-9.
[35] Rai SY, Ravikumar P. Development and evaluation [47] Gandhi S. Optimization of floating microspheres of
of microsphere based topical formulation using captopril using full factorial design. Asian J Biomed
design of experiments. Indian J Pharm Sci. Pharm Sci. 2012 Jan 1;2(15):69.
2016;78(2):182-92. [48] Senthil A, Thakkar HR, Dave MV. Design and
optimization of mucoadhesive microspheres of
ISSN (Online) 2249-6084 (Print) 2250-1029 www.eijppr.comInternational Journal of Pharmaceutical and Phytopharmacological Research (eIJPPR) | April 2021 | Volume 11 | Issue 2 | Page 24-30
Sowjanya Hatthi Belgal Mundarinti, Past Decade Attempts on Gastro Retentive Microspheres Using Factorial Design: A Comprehensive
Literature
Venlaflaxine HCl using 23 full factorial designs.
Pharm Lett. 2011;3(3):202-11.
[49] Natarajan R, Raj GE, Rangapriya M, Rajendran NN.
Optimization and evaluation of mucoadhesive
microspheres of atenolol. Int J Res Pharm Chem.
2011;1(3):722-9.
[50] Patel DM, Patel MJ, Patel AN, Patel CN.
Formulation and evaluation of mixed matrix gastro-
retentive drug delivery for famotidine. Int J Pharm
Investig. 2011 Oct;1(4):247-54.
[51] Dehghan S, Aboofazeli R, Avadi M, Khaksar R.
Formulation optimization of nifedipine containing
microspheres using factorial design. Afr J Pharm
Pharmacol. 2010 Jun 30;4(6):346-54.
[52] Patel J, Patel D, Raval J. Formulation and evaluation
of propranolol hydrochloride-loaded carbopol-
934p/ethyl cellulose mucoadhesive microspheres.
Iran J Pharm Res. 2010;9(3):221-32.
[53] Kharia AA, Hiremath SN, Singhai AK, Omray LK,
Jain SK. Design and optimization of floating drug
delivery system of acyclovir. Indian J Pharm Sci.
2010 Sep;72(5):599-606.
[54] Rao MR, Borate SG, Thanki KC, Ranpise AA,
Parikh GN. Development and in vitro evaluation of
floating rosiglitazone maleate microspheres. Drug
Dev Ind Pharm. 2009 Jul 1;35(7):834-42.
30
ISSN (Online) 2249-6084 (Print) 2250-1029 www.eijppr.comYou can also read
