Pradeep HK, Girish B, Nooruddeen K, Thimmasetty J, Venkateswarlu BS
Pradeep HK1*, Girish B2, Nooruddeen K3, Thimmasetty J4, Venkateswarlu BS5
1Assistant Professor, Department of Pharmaceutics, GM Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research, Davangere.
2Principal, GM Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research, Davangere.
3Pharmacist, Jabal Al Noor Pharmacy, Souk Jamiyah, U.A.Q., U.A.E.
4Professor, Department of Pharmaceutics, Bapuji Pharmacy College, Davangere.
5Principal, Vinayaka Missions College of Pharmacy, Salem, Tamilnadu.
Volume - 14,
Issue - 10,
Year - 2021
The buccal cavity is an alternate route for the administration of the drug. This route gained acceptance as increase in bioavailability is observed due to bypass of first pass metabolism. Solvent casting method was employed for the preparation of the risperidone mucoadhesive patches using different combinations of water soluble and water insoluble polymers using polyvinyl alcohol as a backing layer. Our main objective of this study was to understand the behaviour of water soluble and water insoluble polymers in combination on release pattern. Six different formulations of mucoadhesive patches were evaluated for physicochemical parameters like weight uniformity, content uniformity, thickness uniformity, surface pH, swelling studies, tensile strength, folding endurance, in-vitro drug release, and in-vivo drug absorption. Drug loaded mucoadhesive patches of various polymer bases had shown 35.64 to 72.33% drug release in 30 min in phosphate buffer solution of pH 6.6. In-vitro release data from patches were fit to different equations and kinetic models to explain release profiles. Kinetic models like Hixon-Crowell and Higuchi models were used. The formulation containing HPMC (15Cps) and polyvinyl pyrrolidone was considered as optimized based on the physicochemical and pharmaceutical properties. In-vivo studies in rabbits, carried out with prior permission from IAEC, showed 80.40% of drug release from the optimized patches. In-vivo and in-vitro correlations were found to be good. The drug absorption was found significant from the optimized formulation in healthy rabbits. The structure of the buccal membrane and permeability factors are similar in both human beings and rabbits. Therefore mucoadhesive patches of risperidone may be accepted with the important advantage of reduced risperidone dose.
Cite this article:
Pradeep HK, Girish B, Nooruddeen K, Thimmasetty J, Venkateswarlu BS. Design and In-Vivo Evaluation of Risperidone Buccal Mucoadhesive Patches of Interpolymer Matrix. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2021; 14(10):5305-2. doi: 10.52711/0974-360X.2021.00925
Pradeep HK, Girish B, Nooruddeen K, Thimmasetty J, Venkateswarlu BS. Design and In-Vivo Evaluation of Risperidone Buccal Mucoadhesive Patches of Interpolymer Matrix. Research Journal of Pharmacy and Technology. 2021; 14(10):5305-2. doi: 10.52711/0974-360X.2021.00925 Available on: https://rjptonline.org/AbstractView.aspx?PID=2021-14-10-43
1. Sahu H, Alexander A, Gupta S, Yadav P, Thapa H, Banjare T, et al. Formulation and evaluation of risperidone loaded mouth-dissolving film. Research Journal of Pharmacy Technology 2018; 11(7): 2922-2925
2. Thimmasetty J, Pandey GS, Sathesh Babu PR. Design and in vivo evaluation of carvedilol buccal mucoadhesive patches. Pakistan Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 2008; 21: 241–8.
3. Escalona RCF, Serrano CP, Lopez CM, Escobar CJJ. Optimization of Unidirectional Mucoadhesive Buccal Patches Based on Chitosan and Pluronic® F-127 for Metoprolol Controlled Release: In Vitro and Ex Vivo Evaluations. Journal of Pharmaceutical Innovation 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12247-019-09401-8.
4. Marabathuni VJ, Dinesh P, Ravikumar R, Yamini P, Kiran PS, Hussain SP, et al. Chitosan Based Sustained Release Mucoadhesive Buccal Patches Containing Amlod ipine Besylate (AMB). Asian Journal of Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences 2017; 7: 97.
5. Samanthula KS, Satla SR, Bairi AG. Development, In-Vitro and Ex-Vivo Evaluation of Muco-adhesive Buccal patches of Candesartan cilexetil. Research Journal of Pharmacy Technology 2019; 12(6): 3038-3044.
6. Roda A, Prabhu P, Dubey A. Design and evaluation of buccal patches containing combination of hydrochlorothiazide and atenolol. International Journal of Applied Pharmceutics 2018; 10: 105–12.
7. Zayed GM, Rasoul SA El, Ibrahim MA, Saddik MS, Alshora DH. In vitro and in vivo characterization of domperidone-loaded fast dissolving buccal films. Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal 2020; 28(3): 266-73.
8. Arifa Begum S, Sravya AHLB, Deepika BGD, Naga Manasa G, Srujana M, Uma V, et al. Formulation and evaluation of fexofenadine buccal mucoadhesive patches. Research Journal of Pharmacy Technology 2018; 11: 4892–8.
9. Zaman M, Hanif M, Shaheryar ZA. Development of Tizanidine HCl-Meloxicam loaded mucoadhesive buccal films: In-vitro and in-vivo evaluation. PLoS One 2018; 13(3): e0194410.
10. Jassim ZE, Mohammed MF, Sadeq ZA. Formulation and evaluation of fast dissolving film of lornoxicam. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical Clinical Research 2018; 11(9): 217.
11. Saha P, Das PS. Formulation Development and Evaluation of Buccal Patches of Aceclofenac for Gingivitis. Research Journal of Pharmacy Technology 2017; 9: 163.
12. Patil ND, Gondkar SB, Saudagar RB. Formulation and Evaluation of Mucoadhesive Buccal Patch of Saxagliptin Hydrochloride. Research Journal of Pharmacy Technology 2016; 8: 237.
13. Marnoor SA. Formulation and Evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal patches of Terbutaline Sulphate. Research Journal of Pharmacy Technology 2016; 8(4): 248-54.
14. Wani MS, Dehghan MH, Mahendrakumar C, Polshettiwar SA, Yadav VB. Design and evaluation of Terbutaline sulphate buccal patch. Research Journal of Pharmacy Technology 2009; 2: 86-90.
15. Jagdale Swati C, Hable Asawaree A, Kuchekar Bhanudas S, Chabukswar Aniruddha R. Development and evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal patches of nifedipine. Research Journal of Pharmacy Technology 2011; 4(6): 944-8.
16. Smart JD. Buccal drug delivery. Expert Opinion Drug Delivery 2005; 2(3): 507-17.
17. Kumar D, Kumar K, Sarma D, Kumar K, Ahmad S, Geethavani M. Buccal Patches-A Review. Research Journal of Pharmacy Technology 2014; 6: 167–73.
18. Madhav NVS, Shakya AK, Shakya P, Singh K. Orotransmucosal drug delivery systems: A review. Journal of Controlled Release 2009; 140(1): 2-11.
19. Reddy PC, Chaitanya KSC, Y. Rao MY. A review on bioadhesive buccal drug delivery systems: Current status of formulation and evaluation methods. DARU, Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 2011; 19(6): 385–403.
20. Ahuja A, Khar RK, Ali J. Mucoadhesive drug delivery systems. Drug Delivery Industrial Pharmacy 1997; 23(5): 489-515.
21. Risperidone Dosage Guide with Precautions - Drugs.com n.d; Available from: https://www.drugs.com/dosage/risperidone.html.
22. Risperdal, Risperdal Consta (risperidone) dosing, indications, interactions, adverse effects, and more n.d. Available from: https://reference.medscape.com/drug/perseris-risperdal-consta-risperidone-342986.
23. Kadam VS, etal. Formulation And Evaluation Of Fast Dissolving Oral Film Of Metoclopramide Hcl. World Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences 2017; 6(8): 2052-66.
24. Semalty A, Semalty M, Nautiyal U. Formulation and evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal films of enalapril maleate. Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 2010; 72: 571–5.
25. Hao J, Heng PWS. Buccal delivery systems. Drug Delivery Industrial Pharmacy 2003; 29(8): 821-32.