Topical piroxicam in vitro release and in vivo anti-inflammatory and analgesic effects from palm oil esters-based nanocream

Figures & data

Figure 1 Comparative mean in vitro cellulose acetate membrane transport profiles of piroxicam from formulations F2, F3 and reference gel.

Note: Mean ± S.D., N = 3.

Table 1 Mean T_50% drug transport across the cellulose acetate membrane from different formulations

Formulation	T50% (hr)
Formulation F2	4.30 ± 0.249
Formulation F3	3.05 ± 0.244
Reference	3.98 ± 0.047

Note: Mean ± S.D., N = 3.

Figure 2 Comparative mean in vitro rat skin permeation profiles of piroxicam from formulations F2, F3 and reference gel.

Note: Mean ± S.D., N = 3.

Table 2 Permeability parameters of the different formulations

Formulation	Flux (μg/cm^2 hour) × 10^−3*	Permeability coefficient (cm/hour)*
Reference	3.10 ± 0.65	0.59 ± 0.12
Formulation F2	4.92 ± 0.26	0.94 ± 0.05
Formulation F3	10.22 ± 0.16	1.95 ± 0.03

* Note: Mean ± standard deviation, n = 3.

Figure 3 The effect of topical administration of different formulations of piroxicam on rat hind paw edema at 2, 4 and 6 hours after administration of carrageenan.

Notes: *** and ** indicate significant at P < 0.001 and P < 0.01, respectively. Mean ± S.D., N = 6.

Figure 4 The effect of topical administration of different formulations of piroxicam on rat hind paw hyperalgesia at 2 and 4 hours after administration of carrageenan.

Notes: *** and ** indicate significant at P < 0.001 and P < 0.01, respectively. Mean ± S.D., N = 6.