Mucoadhesive Polymeric Hydrogels for Nasal Delivery of Acyclovir

References

• C. R. Behl, H. K. Pimplaskar, J. Sileno, J. deMeireles, V. D. Romeo. 1998. Effects of physicochemical properties and other factors on systemic nasal drug delivery. Adv. Drug Deli. Rev. 29:89–116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Benamer, M. Mahlous, A. Boukrif, B. Mansouri, S. L. Youcef. 2006. Synthesis and characterization of hydrogels based on poly(vinyl-pyrrolidone). Nucl. Instrum. Methods. Phys. Res. B. 248:284–290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U. Bertram, R. Bodmeier. 2006. In situ gelling, bioadhesive nasal inserts for extended drug delivery: In vitro characterization of a new nasal dosage form. Eur. J. Pharm. Sic. 27:62–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. Bonacucina, M. Cespi, M. Misici-Falzi, G. F. Palmieri. 2006. Rheological, adhesive and release characterization of semisolid carbopol/tetraglycol systems. Int. J. Pharm. 307:129–140.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. C. Bonferoni, S. Rossi, F. Ferrari, C. Caramella. 1999. A modification Franz diffusion cell for simultaneous assessment of drug release and washability of mucoadhesive gels. Pharm. Devel. Technol. 4:45–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. K. Can, B. Denizli, S. Kavlak, A. Guner. 2005. Preparation and swelling studies of biocompatible hydrogel systems by using gamma radiation-induced polymerization. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 72:483–488.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. Critchley, S. S. Davis, M. F. Farraj, L. Illum. 1994. Nasal absorption of desmopressin in rats and sheep. Effect of a bioadhesive microspheres delivery system. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 46:651–656.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O. Diez-Sales, T. M. Garrigues, J. V. Herraez, R. Belda, A. Martín-Villodre, M. Herraez. 2005. In vitro percutaneous penetration of acyclovir from solvent systems and Carbopol 971-P hydrogels: Influence of propylene glycol. J. Pharm. Sci. 94:1039–1047.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. Eouani, P. H. Piccerelle, P. Prinderre, E. Bourret, J. Joachim. 2001. In-vitro comparative study of buccal mucoadhesive performance of different polymeric films. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 52:45–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. Fiebrig, S. E. Harding, A. J. Rowe, S. C. Hyman, S. S. Davis. 1995. Transmission electron microscope studies on pig gastric mucin and its interactions with chitosan. Carbohydr. Polym. 28:239–244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. T. Florence, D. Attwood. 1998. Physicochemical principles of pharmacy (3rd ed. ). London: Macmillan Press.
   Google Scholar
• E. Gavini, G. Rassu, V. Sanna, M. Cossu, P. Giunchedi. 2005. Mucoadhesive microspheres for nasal administration of an antiemetic drug, metaclopramide: In-vivo/ex-vivo studies. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 57:287–294.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• V. Grabovac, D. Guggi, A. Bernkop-Schnurch. 2005. Mucoadhesive polymers: Strategies, achievements and future challenges. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 57:1713–1723.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Güner, M. Ataman. 1997. Effects of inorganic salts on the properties of aqueous PVP solutions. Colloid. Polym. Sci. 272:175–180.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Guo, Q. Ping, G. Jiang, J. Q. S. Dong, L. Feng, Z. Li, C. Li. 2004. Transport of leuprolide across rat intestine, rabbit intestine and Caco-2 cell monolayer. Int. J. Pharm. 278:415–422.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. Hägerström, K. Edsman. 2003. Limitations of the rheological mucoadhesion method: The effect of the choice of conditions and the rheological synergism parameter. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 18:349–357.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. A. Haslwanter, W. F. Rencher. 1999. Nasal spray compositions exhibiting increased retention in the nasal cavity. U.S. Patent No. 5897858, April 27.
   Google Scholar
• M. J. Hernández, J. Pellicer, I. Delegido, M. Dolz. 1998. Rheological characterization of easy to disperse (ETD) carbopol hydrogels. J. Disper. Sci. Technol. 19:31–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L. Illum. 1996. Nasal delivery. The use of animal models to predict performance in man. J. Drug Target. 3:427–442.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. K. Jain, R. K. Jain, M. K Chourasia, A. K. Jain, K. B. Chalasani, V. Soni, A. Jain. 2005. Design and development of multivesicular liposomal depot delivery system for controlled systemic delivery of acyclovir sodium. AAPS PharmSciTech 6:35–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Knapezyk. 1993. Chitosan hydrogel as a base for semisolid drug forms. Int. J. Pharm. 93:233–237.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. M. Lehr, J. A. Bouwstra, E. H. Schacht, H. E. Junginger. 1992. In-vitro evaluation of mucoadhesive properties of chitosan and some other natural polymers. Int. J. Pharm. 78:43–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. J. Majithiya, P. K. Ghosh, M. L. Umrethia, R. S. Murthy. 2006. Thermoreversible-mucoaadhesive gel for nasal delivery of sumatriptan. AAPS. PharmSciTech 7:1–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E. Mattrin, N. G. M. Schipper, J. C. Verhoef, F. W. Merkus. 1998. Nasal mucociliary clearance as a factor for nasal drug delivery. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 29:13–38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• I. G. Needleman, F. C. Smales. 1995. In vitro assessment of bioadhesion for periodontal and buccal drug delivery. Biomaterials 16:617–624.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• W. Paul, C. P. Sharma. 2000. Chitosan, a drug carrier for the 21st century: A review. S.T.P. Pharm. Sci. 10:5–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• N. A. Peppas, J. J. Sahlin. 1996. Hydrogels as mucoadhesive and bioadhesive materials: a review. Biomaterials 17:1553–1561.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• G. Ponchel, F. Lejoyeux, D. DucheÃne. 1991. Bioadhesion of poly (acrylic acid) containing systems. Thermodynamics and rheological aspects. Proceedings of International Symposium on Control Release Bioactive Materials, 18, 111–112.
   Google Scholar
• A. Roos, C. Creton, M. B. Novikov, M. M. Feldstein. 2002. Viscoelasticity and tack of poly(vinyl pyrrolidone)–poly(ethylene glycol) blends. J. Polym. Sci. Part. B Polym. Phys. 40:2395–2409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. M. Rosiak, P. Ulanski, L. A. Pajewnski, F. Yoshii, K. Makuuchi. 1995. Radiation formation of hydrogels for biomedical purpose. Some remarks and comments. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 46:161–168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. M. Rosiak, F. Yoshii. 1999. Hydrogels and their medical applications. Nucl. Instr. Methods Phys. Res. B. 151:56–64.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Şen, E. N. Avc. 2005. Radiation synthesis of poly(N-vinyl-2-pyrrolidone)–k-carrageenan hydrogels and their use in wound dressing applications. I. Preliminary laboratory tests. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A. 1:187–196.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. K. L. Shaw, A. Cowin, P. J. Wormald. 2001. Standardization of the sheep as a suitable animal model for studying endoscopic sinus surgery. Aust. J. Otolaryngol. 4:23–26.
   Google Scholar
• S. Tamburic, D. Q. M. Craig. 1995a. An investigation into the rheological, dielectric and mucoadhesive properties of poly (acrylic acid) gel system. J. Control Release 37:59–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S. Tamburic, D. Q. M. Craig. 1995b. Rheological evaluation of poly-acrylic acid hydrogels. Pharm. Sci. 1:107–109.
   Google Scholar
• S. Tamburic, D. Q. M. Craig. 1997. A comparison of different in vitro method for measuring mucoadhesive performance. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 44:159–167.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. I. Ugwoke, G. Van den Mooter, N. Verbeke, R. Kinget. 1999. Nasal mucoadhesion delivery systems of the antiparkinsonain drug, apomorphine; influence of drug loading on in-vitro and in-vivo release in rabbits. Int. J. Pharm. 181:125–138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Varshosaz, H. Sadrai, A. Heidar. 2006. Nasal delivery of insulin using bioadhesive chitosan gels. Drug Deliv. 13:31–38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• C. Y. Won, C. C. Chu, J. D. Lee. 1998. Novel biodegradable copolymers containing pendant amine functional groups based on aspartic acid and poly(ethyleneglycol). Polymer 25:6677–6681.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R. Yanai, N. Yamada, K. Ueda, M. Tajiri, T. Matsumoto, K. Kido, S. Nakamura, F. Saito, T. Nishida. 2006. Evaluation of povidone–iodine as a disinfectant solution for contact lenses: Antimicrobial activity and cytotoxicity for corneal epithelial cells. Cont Lens. Anterior. Eye. 29:85–91.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar