ArticleSaudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society2013
An approach for lacidipine loaded gastroretentive formulation prepared by different methods for gastroparesis in diabetic patients.
Article in Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present work deals with various attempts to prepare a gastroretentive formulation of lacidipine for treating gastroparesis. High density sucrose beads were modified by coating with certain polymers, but unfortunately sustained release could not be achieved. Granules were prepared by wet granulation technology using different combinations of polymers and a release of the drug was observed. The method failed to release the drug as per desired specifications. Polymeric coating followed by wet granulation was thought to be a better process to sustain the dissolution rate. The release rate can be modified by the incorporation of different polymeric coatings, but the mucoadhesive potential of granules was only 4.23% which might be due to its large size and the presence of other ingredients. Further, the lacidipine loaded microparticles were prepared by different methods such as compression, ionic gelation with TPP, ionic gelation with TPP and glutaraldehyde, spray drying and coacervation techniques. The formulations were evaluated for average particle size, surface morphology, entrapment efficiency, % yield and mucoadhesive potential. The microparticles prepared by compression method using HPMC K4M and SCMC as mucoadhesive polymers and BaSO4 as high density diluent showed poor bioadhesion (8.3%) and poor release characteristics (100% in 120 min). Ionic gelation with tripolyphosphate yielded microspheres with poor mechanical strength. In order to improve its mechanical strength, TPP ionic gelation was combined with step-wise cross-linking with glutaraldehyde. The additional solidification step to improve mechanical strength left this procedure tedious, time consuming and cytotoxic. Spray drying method gave a very low yield with 46.67% bioadhesion. The method using CaCl2 for ionotropic gelation showed the best results with regard to physical characteristics (well formed discrete, spherical surface microcapsule), particle size (88.57 ± 0.51), in vitro bioadhesion (67.33%), yield (>85%) and loading (>70%).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.