| Title |
Mechanisms of microemulsion enhancing the oral bioavailability of puerarin: comparison between oil-in-water and water-in-oil microemulsions using the single-pass intestinal perfusion method and a chylomicron flow blocking approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s51469 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tian-Tian Tang, Xiong-Bin Hu, De-Hua Liao, Xin-Yi Liu, Da-Xiong Xiang |
| Abstract |
The purpose of the present work was to determine the mechanisms by which microemulsions (MEs) enhance the oral bioavailability of puerarin. The in situ perfusion method was used in rats to study the absorption mechanisms of an oil-in-water (O/W) microemulsion (O/W-ME) and a water-in-oil (W/O) microemulsion (W/O-ME). The possibility of lymphatic transport of the MEs was investigated using a chylomicron flow blocking approach. The results for the absorption mechanisms in the stomach and intestines indicated that the absorption characteristics of the O/W-ME and W/O-ME depend on the segment. The W/O-ME had higher internal membrane permeability than the O/W-ME. The results of the lymphatic transport analyses showed that both the O/W-ME and W/O-ME underwent lymphatic transport and that this pathway was a major contributor to the oral bioavailability of MEs. Furthermore, the type of ME can significantly affect the absorption of puerarin through the lymphatic system due to the oil content and the form of the microemulsion after oral administration. In conclusion, these data indicate that microemulsions are an effective and promising delivery system to enhance the oral bioavailability of poorly water-soluble drugs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 43 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 12 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 12 | 27% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 14 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 November 2013.
All research outputs
#16,721,208
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,088
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,834
of 226,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#48
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 226,635 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.