Publication Ref No.

: IJPRD/2011/PUB/ARTI/VOV-3/ISSUE-2/APRIL/018 ISSN 0974 – 9446

RECENT ADVANCES IN ORAL MUCOADHESIVE DRUG DELIVERY SYSTEMS: A REVIEW

Pranshu Tangri1*,
N.V.Satheesh Madhav1,

1
DIT- Faculty of Pharmacy, Mussoorie Diversion road,
Dehradun-248001, Uttarakhand, India.
Pranshu Tangri Email:patilraj05@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

The current article focuses on the principles of mucoadhesive drug delivery systems based on
adhesion to biological surfaces that are covered by mucus. An overview of the last decade’s
discoveries on mucoadhesion and applications of mucoadhesive hydrogels as drug carriers is given.
Techniques that are frequently used to study the adhesion forces and physicochemical linteractions
between hydrogel, mucus, and the underlying mucosa are reviewed. Typical examples of applications
of mucoadhesive hydrogels to mucosal routes of delivery are given. Finally, the perspectives of the
application of these polymers in drug delivery are discussed. Mucoadhesion can be defined as a state
in which two components, of which one is of biological origin are held together for extended periods of
time by the help of interfacial forces mucoadhesion is the attachement of the drug along with a suitable
carrier to the mucous membrane. Mucoadhesion is a complex phenomenon which involves wetting,
adsorption and interpenetration of polymer chains The mucoadhesive polymers can be categorized into
two broad categories, materials which undergo matrix formation or hydrogel formation by either a water
swellable material or a water soluble material. Mucoadhesive drug delivery systems is one of the most
important novel drug delivery systems with its various advantages and it has a lot of potential in
formulating dosage forms for various chronic diseases.

Key Words: mucoadhesion, bioadhesion, oral mucosa, mucin.

INTRODUCTION adhesion between polymers, either synthetic or

The term bioadhesion refers to any bond
formed between two biological surfaces or a
bond between a biological and a synthetic
surface. In case of bioadhesive drug delivery,
the term bioadhesion is used to describe the
natural and soft tissues or the gastrointestinal
mucosa. In cases where the bond is formed
with the mucus the term mucoadhesion may be
used synonymously with bioadhesion.
Mucoadhesion can be defined as a state in
which two components, of which one is of

International Journal of Pharma Research and Development – Online

www.ijprd.com
151
Publication Ref No.: IJPRD/2011/PUB/ARTI/VOV-3/ISSUE-2/APRIL/018 ISSN 0974 – 9446

biological origin are held together for extended Adsorption theory

periods of time by the help of interfacial forces. Diffusion theory
Generally speaking, bioadhesion is an term
which broadly includes adhesive interactions 3. FACTORS AFFECTING
with any biological or biologically derived MUCOADHESION[6,7]
substance, and mucoadhesion is used when the
bond is formed with a mucosal surface[1]. The mucoadhesion of a drug carrier system to
the mucous membrane depends on the below
2. MECHANISM OF MUCOADHESION mentioned factors.

As stated, mucoadhesion is the attachement of
polymer based factors

the drug along with a suitable carrier to the
mucous membrane. Mucoadhesion is a
complex phenomenon which involves wetting,
adsorption and interpenetration of polymer
chains. Mucoadhesion has the following
mechanism,[2]
1. intimate contact between a bioadhesive
and a membrane( wetting or swelling
phenomenon)[3,4]
2. penetration of the bioadhesive into the
tissue or into the surface of the mucous
membrane(interpenetration)[3,4]
Residence time for most mucosal routes is less
than an hour and typically in minutes, it can be
increased by the addition of an adhesive agent
in the delivery system which is useful to localize
the delivery system and increases the contact
time at the site of absorption.[5] The exact
mechanism of mucoadhesion is not known but
an accepted theory states that a close contact
between the mucoadhesive polymer and mucin
occurs which is followed by the interpenetration
of polymer And mucin. The adhesion is
prolonged due to the formation of van der vaals
forces, hydrogen bonds and electrostatic
bonds.[1]
2.1 Theories of mucoadhesion[2]
Wettability theory
Electronic theory
Fracture theory
molecular weight of the polymer ,
concentration of polymer used of polymer
chains swelling factor stereochemistry of
polymer

physical factors
pH at polymer substrate interfaceapplied
strength, contact time

physiological factors
mucin turn over rate diseased state
4. ADVANTAGES[8]
- prolongs the residence time of the dosage
form at the site of absorption.
- Due to an increased residence time it
enhances absorption and hence the
therapeutic efficacy of the drug
- Excellent accessibility
- Rapid absorption because of enormous
blood supply and good blood flow rates
- increase in drug bioavailability due to first
pass metabolism avoidance
- Drug is protected from degradation in the
acidic environment in the git
- Improved patient compliance- ease of drug
administration
- faster onset of action is achieved due to
mucosal surface

International Journal of Pharma Research and Development – Online

www.ijprd.com
152
Publication Ref No.: IJPRD/2011/PUB/ARTI/VOV-3/ISSUE-2/APRIL/018
5. ORAL MUCOSA
5.1 Oral mucosa
Within the oral mucosal cavity, the buccal
region offers an attractive route of
administration for systemic drug delivery. The
mucosa has a rich blood supply and it is
relatively permeable.[9]
5.1Oral histology
The oral mucosa is composed of an outermost
layer of stratified squamous epithelium. Below
this lies a basement membrane, a lamina
propria followed by the submucosa as the
innermost layer. The epithelium is similar to
stratified squamous epithelia found in the rest of
the body in that it has a mitotically active basal
cell layer, advancing through a number of
differentiating intermediate layers to the
superficial layers, where cells are shed from the
surface of the epithelium [10]. The epithelium of
the buccal mucosa is about 40-50 cell layers
thick, while that of the sublingual epithelium
contains somewhat fewer. The epithelial cells
increase in size and become flatter as they
travel from the basal layers to the superficial
layers. The turnover time for the buccal
epithelium has been estimated at 5-6 days[11],
and this is probably representative of the oral
mucosa as a whole. The oral mucosal thickness
varies depending on the site: the buccal
mucosa measures at 500-800 µm, while the
mucosal thickness of the hard and soft palates,
the floor of the mouth, the ventral tongue, and
the gingivae measure at about 100-200 µm. The
composition of the epithelium also varies
depending on the site in the oral cavity. The
mucosae of areas subject to mechanical stress
(the gingivae and hard palate) are keratinized
similar to the epidermis. The mucosae of the
soft palate, the sublingual, and the buccal
regions, however, are not keratinized [11]. The
keratinized epithelia contain neutral lipids like
International Journal of Pharma Research and Development – Online
www.ijprd.com
ISSN 0974 – 9446
ceramides and acylceramides which have been
associated with the barrier function. These
epithelia are relatively impermeable to water. In
contrast, non-keratinized epithelia, such as the
floor of the mouth and the buccal epithelia, do
not contain acylceramides and only have small
amounts of ceramide. They also contain small
amounts of neutral but polar lipids, mainly
cholesterol sulfate and glucosyl ceramides.
These epithelia have been found to be
considerably more permeable to water than
keratinized epithelia [12,13,14].
6. POLYMERS USED FOR MUCOADHESIVE
DRUG DELIVERY[2,6]
The rheology of the mucoadhesion is a typical
topic and it deals with a number of forces,
factors of the components, state of the material,
its derived properties. Based on the rheological
aspects, We can categorise the mucoadhesive
polymers into two broad categories, materials
which undergo matrix formation or hydrogel
formation by either a water swellable material or
a water soluble material.These carriers
generally polymers are classified as,
Hydrophillic polymers
Hydrogels
Hydrophillic polymers
Contains carboxylic group and possess
excellent mucoadhesive properties.
These are pvp(poly vinyl pyrrolidine)
Mc(methyl cellulose)
Scmc(sodium carboxy metyhyl cellulose)
Hpc(hydroxyl propyl cellulose)
Hydrogels
153
Publication Ref No.: IJPRD/2011/PUB/ARTI/VOV-3/ISSUE-2/APRIL/018
These swell when in contact with water and
adhere to tne mucus membrane. These are
further classified according to their charge
Anionic polymers- carbopol, polyacrylates
Cationic polymers- chitosan
Neural/ non ionic polymers- eudragit
analogues[15-18]
They can also be classified as,[1]
Synthetic polymers
Natural polymers
Synthetic polymers- cellulose derivatives,
carbopols, etc.
Natural polymers- tragacanth, pecyin, gelatin
sodium alginate, acacia.
6.1 Ideal muco polymer Characteristics
A mucoadhesion promotoing agent or the
polymer is added to the formulation which helps
to promote the adhering of the active
pharmaceutical ingredient to the oral mucosa.
The agent can have such additional properties
like swelling so as to promote the disintegration
when in contact with the saliva.
As understood earlier, that various physical and
chemical exchanges can effect the polymer/
mucus adhesion, so as polymer should be
carefully selected with the following properties
in mind.[19]
1) polymer must have a high molecular weight
upto 100.00 or more
this is necessary to promote the
adhesiveness between the polymer and
mucus.[19]
2) long chain polymers-chain length must be
long enough to promote the interpenetration
and it should not be too long that diffusion
becomes a problem.[20]
3) High viscosity
International Journal of Pharma Research and Development – Online
www.ijprd.com
ISSN 0974 – 9446
4) Degree of cross linking- it influences chain
mobility and resistance to dissolution.
Highly cross linked polymers swell in
presence of water and retain their structure.
Swelling favours controlled release of the
drug and increases the polymer/mucus
interpenetration. But as the cross linking
increases, the chain mobility decreases
which reduces the mucoadhesive
strength. [20]
5) Spatial conformation
6) Flexibility of polymer chain- this promotes
the interpenetration of the polymer within
the mucus network.[21]
7) Concentration of the polymer- an optimum
concentration is required to promote the
mucoadhesive strength. It depends
however, on the dosage form. For solid
dosage form the adhesive strength
increases with increase in the polymer
concentration. But in case of semi solod
dosage forms an optimum concentration os
essential beyond which the adhesive
strength decreases.[22]
8) Charge and degree of ionization- the effect
of polymer charge on mucoadhesion was
clearly shown by Bernkop-Schnurch and
Freudl. In this work , various chemical
entities were attached to chitosan and the
mucoadhesive strength was evaluated.
Cationic chitosan hcl showed marked
adhesiveness when compared to the
control. The attachement of EDTA an
anionic group increased the
mucoadshesive strength significantly.
DTPA/chitosan system exhibited lower
mucoadhesive strength than cationic
chitosan and anionic EDTA chitosan
complexes because of low charge. Hence
the mucoadhesive strength can be
attributed as anion>cation>nonionic.[23]
9) Optimum hydration- excessive hydration
leads to decreased mucoadhesive strength
due to formation of a slippery
mucilage.[24,25,26]
154
Publication Ref No.: IJPRD/2011/PUB/ARTI/VOV-3/ISSUE-2/APRIL/018
10) Optimum Ph – mucoadhesion is optimum at
low pH conditions but at higher pH values a
change in the conformation occurs into a
rod like structure making them more
available for inter diffusion and
interpenetration.[27] At at very elevated pH
values, positively charged polymers like
chitosan form polyelectrolyte complexes
with mucus and exhibit strong
[28]
mucoadhesive forces.
11) High applied strength and initial contact
time
12 it should non toxic ,economic
,biocompatible preferabliy biodegradable [29]
6.2 Polymers used for oral mucoadhesive
drug delivery[30]
6.2.1 PAA derivatives carbomer- carbopol
934
noveon- polycarbophil
These are polymers of acrylic acid cross linked
with polyalkenyl ethers or divinyl glycol. They
are produced from primary polymer particles of
about .2 - .6 micron diameter. Each primary
particle exists as a network structure of polymer
cahains interconnected by cross links. Carbopol
polymers along with pemulen and noveon
polymers are all cross linked. They swell in
water upto 1000 times their original volume to
form a gel when exposed to a pHof 4.0 to 6.0.
the glass transition temperature is about 105c.
due to presence of carboxylate group and an
pka of 6.0 to 0.5, repulsion between the
negative charges occurs leading to increased
swelling and hence increased mucoadhesive
strength of the polymer.[31]
Today, a large number of companies are using
carbopol polymers because of the following
merits[31]
- good tabletting formulation flowability.
- Long drug release profiles
International Journal of Pharma Research and Development – Online
www.ijprd.com
ISSN 0974 – 9446
- Can give drug releases profiles similar to
carbopol 971oNF, with better handling
characterstics.
- Are safe and effective for oral
administration
- Arebioadhesive and providing increased
bioavailability
- Are approved by many pf the world
pharmacopoeias
- Protect protien and peptides from
degradation and hence increase the
bioavailability of proteins or peptide based
formulations
6.2.2 Chitosan-
It is an cationic polymer(polysaccharide),[32] it is
produced by the deacetylation of chitin.
Chitosan is gaining importance in the
development of mucoadhesive drug delivery
system because of its good biocompatibility,
biodegradability and non toxic nature. It binds to
the mucosa via ionic bonds between the amino
group and sialic acid residues. Chitosan being
linear provides greater polymer chain flexibility.
Onishi and Machida showed that chitosan and
its metaboloized derivatives are quickly
eliminated by the kidney.[33]
6.2.3 Newer second generation polymers[2]
They have the following advantages[2]
- more site specific hence called
cytoadhesives.
- Are least effected by mucus turn over
rates.,
- Site specific drug delivery is possible.
a) Lectins-
Lectins are naturally occurring proteins that are
useful in biological recognition involving cells
and proteins. Lectins are a class of structurally
diverse proteins and glycoprotein that bind
reversibly to specific carbohydrate residues.[34]
After binding to the cell the lectins may either
remain on the cell surface or may be taken
155
Publication Ref No.: IJPRD/2011/PUB/ARTI/VOV-3/ISSUE-2/APRIL/018 ISSN 0974 – 9446

inside the cell via endocytosis., they hence - Lele et al, investigated novel polymers of
allow a method for site specific and controlled PAA complexed with PEGylated drug
drug delivery. The lectins have many conjugate.[39]
advantages but they also have the - A new class of hydrophilic pressure
disadvantage of being immunogenic. sensitive adhesives(PSA) have been
developed by corium technologies. Corplex
b) Thiolated polymers- have been prepared by non covalent
These are thiomers which are derived from hydrogen bonding crosslinking of a film
hydrophilic polymers such as polyacrylates, forming hydrphillic polymer with a short
chitosan or deacetylated gallan gum. The chain plasticizer having reactive OH groups
presence of the thiol group increases the at chain ends.
residence time by promoting covalent bonds - Bogataj et. Al prepared and studied
with the cystiene residues in mucus. The Mucoadhesive microspheres for application
disulphide bonds may also alter the mechanism in urinary bladder[40]
of drug release from the delivery system due to - Langath N et.al. investigated the benefit of
increased rigidity and cross linking.[35] thiolated polymers for the development of
e.x. chitosan iminothiolane buccal drug delivery systems.[41]
PAA homocystiene - Alur H.H. et.al., studied the transmucosal
Paa cystiene sustained delivery of chlorphenazine
Alginate cystiene maleate in rabbits using a novel natural
mucoadhesive gum from hakea as an
c) polyox WSR- excipient in buccal tablets. The gum
A class of high molecular weight polyethylene provided sustained releawse and sufficient
molecular weright polyethylene oxide mucoadhesion.[42]
homopolymers having the following
properties,[36] 7. METHODS OF EVALUATION
-water soluble
-hydrophillic nature Mucoadhesive polymers can be evaluated by
- high molecular weight testing their adhesion strength by both in vitro
- functional group for hydrogen and in vivo tests.
bondimg 7.1 In vitro tests / exvivo
- biocompatible and non toxic The importance is layed on the elucidation of
- can be formulated into tablets, the exact mechanisms of bioadhesion. These
films, gels, microcapsules, syrups. methods are,[43]
- methods determining tensile strength
6.2.4 Novel polymers - methods determining shear stress
- adhesion weight method
- Tomato lectin showed that it has binding - fluorescent probe method
selectivity to the small intestine - flow channel method
epithelium.[37] - mechanical spectroscopic method
- Shajaei and Li have designed and - falling liquid film method
characterized a co polymer of PAA and - colloidal gold staining method
PEG monoethylether mono - viscometer method
methacrylate(PAA-co-PEG) for exhibiting - thumb method
optimal buccal adhesion [38] - adhesion number

International Journal of Pharma Research and Development – Online

www.ijprd.com
156
Publication Ref No.: IJPRD/2011/PUB/ARTI/VOV-3/ISSUE-2/APRIL/018
- electrical conductance
- swelling properties
- in vitro drug release studies
- mucoretentability studies
7.2 in vivo methods[44]
- use of radioisotopes
- use of gamma scintigraphy
- use of pharmacoscintigraphy
- use of electron paramagnetic
resonance(EPR) oximetry
- X ray studies
- Isolated loop technique
8. RECENT APPLICATIONS IN ORAL
MUCOADHESIVE DRUG DELIVERY
Oral mucoadhesive drug delivery has
widespread applications for many drugs which
on oral administration result in poor
bioavailability and are rapidly degraded by the
oral mucoadhesive drug delivery provides
advantages of high accessibility and low
enzymatic activity.[2]
Earlier the hydrophilic polymers like SCMC,
HPC and polycarbophil were used for the
treatment of periodontal diseases, but now the
trend is shifting towards the effective utilization
of these systems to the delivery of peptides,
proteins and polysaccharides.[2,45]
The buccal cavity has additional advantages of
high patient compliance. Orabase, a first
generation mucoadhesive paste has been used
as barrier system for mouth ulcers. Semisolids
offer more ease in administration, but tablets
have also been formulated. Tablet include
matrix devices or multilayered systems
containing a mucoadhesive agent. the tablet is
kept under the upper lip to avoid clearance
mechanism of the salivary gland. Buccostem,
an adhesive antiemetic tablet containing
prochlorperazine is usually administered in this
manner.[46,47]
International Journal of Pharma Research and Development – Online
www.ijprd.com
ISSN 0974 – 9446
Buccal mucoadhesive dosage forms may be
classified into three types,
- a single layer device with multidirectional
drug release.
- An dosage form with impermeable backing
layer which is superimposed on top of an
drug loaded bioadhesive layer, creating a
double layered device and preventing loss
from the top surface of the dosage form into
the oral cavity.
- Unidirectional release device, the drug is
releasesd only from the side adjacent to the
buccal mucosa.
The following drugs have been formulated as
oral mucoadhesive drug delivery devices in the
form of tablets, films, patches etc.(table no. 1).
9. CONCLUSIONS:
The phenomenon of mucoadhesion can be
used as a model for the controlled drug delivery
approaches for a number of drug candidates.
The various advantages of the oral
mucoadhesive drug delivery systems like
prolongation of the residence time of the drug
which in turn increases the absorption of the
drug are important factors in the oral
bioavailability of many drugs. The factors which
are determinant in the overall success of the
mucoadhesive drug delivery are the polymer
physicochemical properties and the in-vivo
factors such as the mucin turn over rate, mucin
flow. A number of both in-vitro and in-vivo
techniques have been developed for the
evaluation of the mucoadhesive drug delivery
systems. Mucoadhesive dosage forms extend
from the simple oral mucosal delivery to the
nasal, vaginal, ocular and rectal drug delivery
systems. The most widely studied and accepted
polymers for mucoadhesion have been the
hydrophilic, high molecular weight, anionic
molecules like carbomers. Recently the focus
has been on the novel second generation
157
Publication Ref No.: IJPRD/2011/PUB/ARTI/VOV-3/ISSUE-2/APRIL/018
polymers like the thiolated polymers, lectins and
lecithins.
Despite the huge amount of work been done on
this drug dekivery platform, the focus has been
primarily on the formulation of gastroretentive
dosage forms, hence, work must be done to
exploit this drug delivery system for various
other approaches like drug targeting and site
specific drug delivery systems.
10. REFERENCES
1. S. Ganga, mucosal drug delivery – a review,
Vol. 5 issue 6, 2007. http// www.pharmainfo.net.
Accessed on 08/07/2010.
2. G.P. Andrews et al., Mucoadhesive polymeric
platforms for controlled drug delivery, Eur. J.
Pharm. Biopharm,71,2009,505-518.
3. Chowdary K.P.R., Srinivas L., Mucoadhesive
drug delivery systems: A review of current
status, Indian Drugs, 2000,37(9), 400-406.
4. Gandhi R.B., Robinson J.R., Bioadhesion in
drug delivery. Ind. J. Pharm. Sci., 1988,50(3),
145-152.
5. Yang X, Robinson JR. In : Okano T, ed.
Biorelated functional polymers and gels :
controlled release and applications in
biomedical engineering, San Diego: Academic
Press, 1998, 135.
6. Chen J.L., Cyr. G.N., Composition
producing adhesion through hydration., In
mainly R.S., ed., Adhesion in biological system.
New York; Academic Press, 163-181.
7. Ch’ng H.S., Park H., Kelly P., Robinson J.R.,
Bioadhesive polymers as platform for oral
controlled drug delivery., II: Synthesis and
evaluation of some swelling water insoluble
bioadhesive polymers. ,J. Pharm. Sci,1985,74,
399-405.
International Journal of Pharma Research and Development – Online
www.ijprd.com
ISSN 0974 – 9446
8. G.S. Asane, mucoadhesive gastro intestinal
drug delivery system : an overview,vol. 5 issue
6,(2007). http// www.pharmainfo.net. Accessed
on 06/07/2010.
9. Squier, C.A.and Wertz, P.W., Structure and
Function of the Oral Mucosa and Implications
for Drug Delivery, in, M.J. Rathbone, Eds; Oral
Mucosal Drug Delivery, (1996),Marcel Dekker,
Inc., New York,1-26.
10. Gandhi, R.E. and Robinson, J.R.,
Bioadhesion in drug delivery, Ind. J. Pharm.
Sci., 50, 1988, 145-152.
11. Harris, D. and Robinson, J.R., Drug delivery
via the mucous membranes of the oral cavity, J.
Pharm. Sci., 81, 1992, 1-10. (1992).
12. Wertz, P.W. and Squier, C.A., Cellular and
molecular basis of barrier function in oral
epithelium, Crit. Rev. Ther. Drug Carr. Sys, 8,
1991, 237-269.
13. Squier, C.A., Cox, P., and Wertz, P.W.,
Lipid content and water permeability of skin and
oral mucosa, The J. Invest. Dermat, 96, 1991,
123-126.
14. Zhang, J., Niu, S., Ebert, C., and Stanley,
T.H., An in vivo dog model for studying recovery
kinetics of the buccal mucosa permeation
barrier after exposure to permeation enhancers:
apparent evidence of effective enhancement
without tissue damage, Int. J. Pharm.,101,
1994, 15-22.
15.Squier, C.A.and Wertz, P.W., Structure and
Function of the Oral Mucosa and Implications
for Drug Delivery, in, M.J. Rathbone, Eds; Oral
Mucosal Drug Delivery, (1996), Marcel Dekker,
Inc., New York,1-26.
158
Publication Ref No.: IJPRD/2011/PUB/ARTI/VOV-3/ISSUE-2/APRIL/018
16.Harris, D. and Robinson, J.R., Drug Delivery
via the Mucous Membranes of
The Oral Cavity, J. Pharm. Sci., 81, 1992, 1-10.
17.Khar, R.K., Ahuja, A. and Ali, J., In; Jain,
N.K., Eds , Controlled and
Novel Drug Delivery, CBS Publishers &
Distributors, New Delhi, 2002, 353-55.
18.Gandhi, R.B. and Robinson, J.R., Oral cavity
as a Site for Bioadhesive Drug
Delivery, Adv. Drug Del. Rev., 13, 1994, 43-74.
19.Allur, H.H., Johnston, T.P. and Mitra, A.K.,
In; Swarbrick,J. and Boylan, J.C., Eds.,
Encyclopedia of Pharmaceutical Technology,
Vol.20(3), (1990), Marcel Dekker, New
York, 193-218.
20 Y. Huang, W. Leobandung, A. Foss, N.A.
Peppas, molecular aspects of mucoadhesion
and bioadhesion: tethered structures and site
specific surfaces, J. Control. Release 65, 2000,
63-71.
21 Y. Sudhakar, K. Kuotsu, A.K.
Bandyopadhyay, buccal bioadhesive drug
delivery – a promising option for orally less
efficient drugs, J. Control. Release 114, 2006,
15-40.
22. M.E. Imam, M. Hornof, C. Valenta, G.
Reznicek, A. Bernkop- Schnurch, evidence for
the interpretation of mucoadhesive polymers
into the mucus gel layer, STP Pharma. Sci. 13,
2003, 171-176
23. M.I. Ugwoke, R.U. Agu, N. Verbeke, R.
Kinget, nasal mucoadhesive drug delivery:
background, applications, trends and future
perspectives, Adv. Drug delivery. Rev. 57,
2005,1640-1665.
24. A. Bernkop-Schnurch, J.Freudl, comparative
in vitro study of different chitosan-complrxing
International Journal of Pharma Research and Development – Online
www.ijprd.com
ISSN 0974 – 9446
agent conjugates, Pharmazie 54, 1999, 369-
371.
25.H. Hagerstrom, M. Paulsson, K.Edsman,
evaluation of mucoadhesion for two
polyethylene gels in simulated physiological
conditions using a rheological method, Eur. J.
Pharm. Sci 9, 2000, 301-309
26. H. Sigurdsson, T. Loftsson, C. Lehr,
assessment of mucoadhesion by a resonant
mirror biosensor, Int. J. Pharm. 325, 2006, 75-
81.
27. S.A. Mortazavi, J.Smart, an investigation
into the role of water movement and mucus gel
dehydration in mucoadhesion, J.Control.
Release 25, 1993, 197-203
28. J.W.Lee, J.H. Park, J.R. Robinmson,
bioadhesive based dosage forms: the next
generation, J Pharm. Sci 89, 2000, 850-866.
29. N.Peppas. Y. Huang, nanoscale technology
of mucoadhesive interactions, Adv. Drug Deliv.
Rev. 56, 2004, 1675-1687.
30. A. Shojaei, X. Li, Mechanisms of buccal
mucoadhesion of novel copolymers of acrylic
acid and polyethylene glycol monomethylether
monomethacrylate, J.Control, Release 47,
1997, 151-161.
31. K. Park, J. R. Robinson, bioadhesive
polymers as platforms for oral controlleds drug
delivery: method
32. ,Jian-Hwa Guo, PhD ,Carbopol polymers for
pharmaceutical drug delivery applications.
Excipient Updates. Drug Delivery Technology.
http://www.drugdeliverytech.com/cgi-
bin/articles.cpi?idArticle=159
159
Publication Ref No.: IJPRD/2011/PUB/ARTI/VOV-3/ISSUE-2/APRIL/018 ISSN 0974 – 9446

33. P.He, S.Davis, L Illum, in vitro evaluation of gum as an Excipient in Buccal Tablets, Int. J.
the mucoadhesive properties of chitosan Pharm.,88(1),1999, 1-10.
microspheres, Int.J.Pharm. 166,1998, 75-88.
42.Langoth, N., Kalbe, J. and Bernkop-
34. H.Onishi, Y.Machida, biodegradation and Schnurch, A., Developmen6t of Buccal
distribution of water soluble chitosan in mice, Drug Delivery Systems Based on a Thiolated
biomaterials 20, 1999, 175-182. Polymer, Int. J. Pharm.,
252,2003, 141-48.
35. M.A. Clark, B.Hirst, M. Jepson, lectin
mediated mucosal delivery bof drugs and 43.Botagataj, M., Mrhar, A. and Korosec, L.,
microparticles, Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 43, 2000, Influence of Physicochemical and
207-223. Biological Parameters on Drug Release from
Microspheres Adhered on Vesicular
36. C.Lehr, lectin mediated drug delivery: the and Intesitnal Mucosa, Int. J. Pharm., 177,
second generation of bioadhesives, J.Control. 1999, 211-20.
Release 65, 2000, 135-143.
44. Sam AP, Van Dan Heuij JT, Tukker J.
Mucoadhesion of both film- forming and non-
37. P.Bottenberg et al. “development and film forming polymeric materials as evaluated
testing of bioadhesive, fluoride-containing slow with the Wilhelmy plate method. Int J Pharm,
release tablets for oral use”, J.Pharm. 53, 1989, 97-105.
Pharmacol.43,1991, 457-464.
45. DavisSS, Hardy JG, Taylor MJ, Stockwell A,
38.Carreno-Gomez B, Woodley J.F, Florence Whalley DR, Wilson CG. The in vivo evaluation
A.T. Studies on the uptake of tomato of an osmotic device (osmet) Using gamma
lectin nanoparticles in everted gut sacs. Int. J. scintography. J Pharm Pharmacol, 36, 1984,
Pharm., 183,1999, 7-11. 740-742.

39. Shojaei, A.M. and LI, X., Mechanism of 46. V.M. Patel, B.G. Prajapati, M.M. Patel,
Buccal Mucoadhesion of Novel Copolymersof formulation, evaluation and comparision of
Acrylic Acid and Polyethylene Glycol bilayered and multilayered mucoadhesive
Monomethylether Monomethacrylate,J. Control. buccal devices of propranolol hydrochloride.
Release, 47, 1997, 151-61. AAPS PharmSciTech. 8, 2007, 22-28.

40.Lele, B.S. and Hoffman, A.S., Mucoadhesive 47. N.Nafee, F. Ismail, N.Boraie, L. Mortada,
Drug Carriers Based on Complexes Mucoadhesive buccal patches of miconazole
of poly(acrylic acid) and PEGylated Drugs nitrare : in vitro/in vivo performance and effect
having Hydrolysable PEG-anhydride-drug of ageing, Int.J.Pharm. 264, 2003, 1-14.
Linkages, J. Control. Release, 69,2000, 237-
248. 48. I. Bravo- Osuna, C. Vauthier, A.
Fartabollini, G. Palmieri, G. Ponchel,
41.Alur, H.H., Pather, S.I., Mitra, A.K. and mucoadhesion mechjanism of chitosan and
Johnston, T.P., Transmucosal Sustained thiolated chitosan poly(isobutylcyanoacrylate)
–Delivery of Chlorpheniramine Maleate in core- shell nanoparticles, biomaterials 28 ,2007,
Rabbits using a Novel, Natural Mucoadhesive 2233-2243.

International Journal of Pharma Research and Development – Online

www.ijprd.com
160
Publication Ref No.: IJPRD/2011/PUB/ARTI/VOV-3/ISSUE-2/APRIL/018 ISSN 0974 – 9446

49. Ramana MV, Nagda C, Himaja M. Design 54. R Khanna, SP Agarwal, A Ahuja preparation
and evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal drug and evaluation of mucoadhesive buccal films of
delivery systems containing metoprolol tartrate. clotrimazole for oral candida infections. Shripati
Indian J Pharm Sci, 69, 2007, 515-8. Singhania R and D Centre, J.K.
Pharmaceuticals, 13th mile stone, Faridabad-
50. Altaf MA, S Charyulu N. Ionic gelation 121003, Haryana, India.
controlled drug delivery systems for gastric-
mucoadhesive microcapsules of captopril. 55. Shaila Lewis, G Subramanian, S Pandey, N
Indian J Pharm Sci, 70, 2008, 655-8. Udupa. Design, evaluation and pharmacokinetic
study of mucoadhesive buccal tablets of
51. Semalty M, Semalty A, Kumar G. nicotine for smoking cessation, Department of
Formulation and characterization of Pharmaceutics, Manipal College of
mucoadhesive buccal films of glipizide. Indian J Pharmaceutical Sciences, MAHE, Manipal-
Pharm Sci ,70, 2008, 43-8. 576104, India.

52. Satishbabu BK, Srinivasan BP. Preparation
and evaluation of buccoadhesive films of
atenolol. Indian J Pharm Sci, 70, 2008, 175-9.
53. Nappinnai M, Chandanbala R, Balaijirajan
R. Formulation and evaluation of nitrendipine
buccal films. Indian J Pharm Sci, 70, 2008, 631-
5.
56. PD Nakhat, AA Kondawar, IB Babla, LG
Rathi, PG Yeole, studies on buccoadhesive
tablets of terbutaline sulphate, Department of
Pharmaceutics, Institute of Pharmaceutical
Education and Research, Borgaon (Meghe),
Wardha- 442001, India.

11. TABLES & FIGURES

Table no.1 Recent applications of mucoadhesive drug delivery[48-56]

s.no Description Polymers used Application

1 Design and evaluation of Carbopo934, HPMC, Prolong the duration
mucoadhesive buccal delivery HEC, SCMC of action
systems containing metoprolol
tartarate
2 I onic gelation controlled drug Alginate, chitosan, Control the drug
delivery system for gastric carbopol-934p, CAP, release for a longer
mucoadhesive microparticles of HPMC vduration of time
captopril
3 Formulation and characterization of SCMC, HPMC, films exhibited
mucoadhesive buccal films of carbopol-934p, controllede releses
glipizide eudragitrl-100 for more than 6
hours
4 Prepration and evaluation of Sodium alginate, Double layer

International Journal of Pharma Research and Development – Online

www.ijprd.com
161
Publication Ref No.: IJPRD/2011/PUB/ARTI/VOV-3/ISSUE-2/APRIL/018 ISSN 0974 – 9446

buccoadhesive films of atenolol carbopol 934p, ethyl structure design to

cellulose provide drug delivery
in a unidirectional
manner to the
mucosa
5 Formulation and evaluation of HPMC K100, HPC, Moderate drug
nitredipine buccal films SCMC, sodium release fir extended
alginate, polyvinyl duration
alcohol, carbopol
934p

6 Prepration and evaluation of HPC-M,carbopol Intended for local

mucoadhesive buccal films of 934p delivery.
clotrimazole for oral candida Concentration
infections mainiained above
MIC for 4 hours

7 Design, evaluation and HPMC, sodium Peak plasma

pharmacokinetic study of alginate, carbopol, concentration of
mucoadhesive buccal tablets of chitosan 16.78+-2.27mg was
nicotine by smoking cessation obtained in 2 hours

8 Studies on buccoadhesive tablets Carbopol 934p,

of terbutaline sulphate methocel K4M.
methocel K15M,
SCMC

9 double layered mucoadhesive HPMC, carbomer

tablets by HPMC and carbomer

…End…

International Journal of Pharma Research and Development – Online

www.ijprd.com
162