Development of Bioadhesive Chitosan Gels for Topical Delivery of Lidocaine

Document Type : Original Article(s)

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Skin and Stem Cell Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran And Department of Pharmacognosy, School of Pharmacy, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan Iran

2 Associate Professor, Skin Disease and Leishmaniasis Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan Iran

3 Student of Pharmacy, Skin Disease and Leishmaniasis Research Center And Student Research Committee, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan Iran

Abstract

Background: Lidocaine (LC) is a local anesthetic agent. The aim of this study is the prolonging of the anesthetic effect of this drug for transdermal delivery. Methods: LC hydrochloride gels were prepared with three different molecular weights (MW) and concentrations of chitosan. Lecithin was used as permeation enhancer. Viscosity, bioadhesion, drug release from synthetic membranes, drug permeation through the biological barrier (rat skin) and antinociceptive effect of gels were studied. Increasing the concentration of chitosan caused a decrease in the bioadhesion.Findings: Studing drug release in gels showed that increasing the concentration and MW of chitosan caused an increase in the amount, extent, and rate of influx of the drug. This is probably due to the increase in repulsive forces between LC and chitosan cations. The flux of the drug through the rat skin was higher for 3% high MW chitosan gel (H3) compared to the standard gel. LC was effective topically in hind paw formalin assay. It was most active immediately after its administration. The analgesic activity of LC in H3 gel could cover the duration of the formalin nociception. The maximal response of LC in comparable doses of H3 and standard gel was about 52% and 36% analgesia in the second phase, respectively compared to the control group. Conclusion: The higher response of the H3 gel may be attributed to the bioadhesive effect of the chitosan base and the higher concentrations of LC compared to the standard gel.

Keywords

References

  1. Aulton ME. Pharmaceutics: The Science of Dosage Form Design. 2nd ed. London: Churchill Livingston; 2002.
  2. Gabriele AB, Valenta C. Influence of phloretin on the skin permeation of lidocaine from semisolid preparations. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 2004; 57(2): 307-12.
  3. Koren G. Topical skin anesthesia. Clin Dermatol 1989; 7(3): 136-41.
  4. Chattaraj SC, Walker RB. Penetration enhancer classification. In: Smith EW, Smith HI, editors. Percutaneous Penetration Enhancers. 1st ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 1995.
  5. Walters KA. Penetration enhancers and their use in transdermal therapeutic systems. In: Hadgraft J, Guy RH, editors. Transdermal Drug Delivery.New York, NY: Marcel Dekker; 1989.
  6. Kushla GP, Zatz JL. Evaluation of a noninvasive method for monitoring percutaneous absorption of lidocaine in vivo. Pharm Res 1990; 7(10): 1033-7.
  7. Kushla GP, Zatz JL, Mills OH, Jr., Berger RS. Noninvasive assessment of anesthetic activity of topical lidocaine formulations. J Pharm Sci 1993; 82(11): 1118-22.
  8. Sarpotdar PP, Zatz JL. Evaluation of penetration enhancement of lidocaine by nonionic surfactants through hairless mouse skin in vitro. J Pharm Sci 1986; 75(2): 176-81.
  9. Shin SC, Cho CW, Yang KH. Development of lidocaine gels for enhanced local anesthetic action. Int J Pharm 2004; 287(1-2): 73-8.
  10. Wallace MS, Ridgeway B, Jun E, Schulteis G, Rabussay D, Zhang L. Topical delivery of lidocaine in healthy volunteers by electroporation, electroincorporation, or iontophoresis: an evaluation of skin anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2001; 26(3): 229-38.
  11. Bardocci A, Lofoco G, Perdicaro S, Ciucci F, Manna L. Lidocaine 2% gel versus lidocaine 4% unpreserved drops for topical anesthesia in cataract surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Ophthalmology 2003; 110(1): 144-9.
  12. Kolesnikov Y, Cristea M, Oksman G, Torosjan A, Wilson R. Evaluation of the tail formalin test in mice as a new model to assess local analgesic effects. Brain Res 2004; 1029(2): 217-23.
  13. Abbott FV, Franklin KB, Westbrook RF. The formalin test: scoring properties of the first and second phases of the pain response in rats. Pain 1995; 60(1): 91-102.
  14. Illum L, Farraj NF, Davis SS. Chitosan as a novel nasal delivery system for peptide drugs. Pharm Res 1994; 11(8): 1186-9.
  15. Orienti I, Luppi B, Zecchi V. Chitosan and its N-carboxyethyl and N-aminoethyl derivatives as vehicles for topical formulations. J Cosmet Sci 1999; 50: 307-13.
  16. Ugwoke MI, Verbeke N, Kinget R. The biopharmaceutical aspects of nasal mucoadhesive drug delivery. J Pharm Pharmacol 2001; 53(1): 3-21.
  17. Senel S, Ikinci G, Kas S, Yousefi-Rad A, Sargon MF, Hincal AA. Chitosan films and hydrogels of chlorhexidine gluconate for oral mucosal delivery. Int J Pharm 2000; 193(2): 197-203.
  18. Rege PR, Shukla DJ, Block LH. Chitinosans as tableting excipients for modified release delivery systems. Int J Pharm 1999; 181(1): 49-60.
  19. Ramanathan S, Block LH. The use of chitosan gels as matrices for electrically-modulated drug delivery. J Control Release 2001; 70(1-2): 109-23.
  20. Smith J.Chitosan and transdermal drug delivery. Retinoids 2003; 19: 72-5.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 29, Issue 173 - Serial Number 173
November and December 2012
Pages 3093-3103

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 18 March 2012
  • Revise Date: 02 November 2024
  • Accept Date: 06 April 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics