Mechanisms of buccal mucoadhesion of novel copolymers of acrylic acid and polyethylene glycol monomethylether monomethacrylate

Shojaei, Ali Asghar; Li, Xiaoling

doi:10.1016/s0168-3659(96)01626-4

Cited by 85 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The areas corresponding to water, polymer and mucin were integrated at different times and revealed that the water and mucin wet and penetrate the polymer matrix simultaneously. ATR-FTIR studies have also been used to show how the monomer composition in copolymers influences the formation of intermolecular and intramolecular hydrogen bonds (Shojaei & Li 1997). When poly (ethylene glycol) (PEG) was introduced into PAA the formation of hydrogen bonds was enhanced.…”

Section: Miscellaneous Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Later, Lehr et al (1993) developed a combined spreading coefficient, defined by the geometric mean of the polymer spreading coefficient and the Griffith fracture energy. It has been shown that the combined spreading coefficient, calculated from contact angle measurements, correlates to the force of detachment (Lehr et al 1993;Shojaei & Li 1997). The interfacial energies that are involved in the mucoadhesion process are illustrated in Figure 6.…”

Section: Measurements Of Surface Energiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pharmaceutical applications of mucoadhesion for the non-oral routes

Edsman

Hägerström

2005

Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The adhesion of pharmaceutical formulations to the mucosal tissue offers the possibility of creating an intimate and prolonged contact at the site of administration. This prolonged residence time can result in enhanced absorption and, in combination with a controlled release of the drug, also improved patient compliance by reducing the frequency of administration. During the almost 30 years over which mucoadhesion has been studied, a considerable amount of knowledge has been gained, and much has been learned about the different mechanisms occurring at the formulationmucus interface and the properties that affect these mechanisms. The in-vivo performance of a dosage form not only depends on the mechanisms occurring at the interface, but also on the properties of the total mucoadhesive complex: the dosage form, the mucosa and the interface between them. A wide variety of methods are used for studying mucoadhesion; some rather similar to the in-vivo situation and some mimicking the interface alone. In this review, the mucus surface, the methods used for the study of mucoadhesion, the different mechanisms involved in mucoadhesion and theories underpinning them have been described. The complexity of mucoadhesion when trying to systemize the subject will also be discussed. The last part of the review describes the buccal, nasal, ocular, vaginal and rectal routes and provides examples of what can be achieved in-vivo when using mucoadhesive formulations.

show abstract

Section: Miscellaneous Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Measurements Of Surface Energiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pharmaceutical applications of mucoadhesion for the non-oral routes

Edsman

Hägerström

2005

Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2A). This association may be related to the chemical nature of the mucus which has been shown to vary between different regions of the intestine in three other flatfish species (Murray et al 1996), and these characteristics might alter the number of potential bonding sites for PEG (Shojaei and Li, 1997). Furthermore, the abundance of certain mucin residues may thus determine the extent to which PEG interacts with, or adheres to, the mucus layer.…”

Section: Interactions With the Mucosal Layermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, because two to three water molecules can be bound per PEG repeat unit (Antonsen and Hoffman, 1992), the effective molecular size of PEG is increased in aqueous solution, and this is considered to reduce potential interactions with the mucus layer, as well as absorption across the epithelium (Schiller et al 1997). In contrast to this view, the lone pair of electrons on the oxygen atom of the PEG repeat unit (CH 2 CH 2 O) offers numerous potential hydrogen bond acceptors for adhesion to the ionised sialic acid residues of mucus (Shojaei and Li, 1997). Furthermore, PEG adsorbs to glass and polypropylene (Crouthamel and Van Dyke, 1975;Gulliford et al 1987) …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring intestinal fluid transport in vitro: Gravimetric method versus non-absorbable marker

Whittamore

Genz

Grosell

et al. 2016

Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Molecular &

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The gut sac is a long-standing, widely used in vitro preparation for studying solute and water transport, and calculation of these fluxes requires an accurate assessment of volume. This is commonly determined gravimetrically by measuring the change in mass over time. While convenient this likely under-estimates actual net water flux ( ) due to tissue edema. We evaluated whether the popular in vivo volume marker [ While it was possible to circumvent this using unlabelled PEG 4000, this had a deleterious effect on PEGbased . We also found sequestration of PEG within the intestinal mucus. In conclusion, the short-comings

show abstract

“…These events need liquid-like (viscid) characteristics. In addition, the entirety of the mucoadhesive bond may be confirmed alone when the adhesive obtains mechanical force and time retention (4,5). Hydrogel adhesives in fact have viscoelastic characteristics and therefore are appropriate for mucoadhesive systems as main materials (6,7).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%