| Title |
Nanoethosomal transdermal delivery of vardenafil for treatment of erectile dysfunction: optimization, characterization, and in vivo evaluation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s94615 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Usama A Fahmy |
| Abstract |
Vesicular drug delivery systems have recently gained attention as a way of improving dosing accuracy for drugs with poor transdermal permeation. The current study focuses on utilization of the natural biocompatible vesicles to formulate vardenafil nanoethosomes (VRD-NE), for the enhancement of their transdermal permeation and bioavailability. Fifteen formulations were prepared by thin-layer evaporation technique according to Box-Behnken design to optimize formulation variables. The effects of lipid composition, sonication time, and ethanol concentration on particle size and encapsulation efficiency were studied. The diffusion of vardenafil (VRD) from the prepared nanoethosomes specified by the design was carried out using automated Franz diffusion cell apparatus. The optimized formula was investigated for in vivo pharmacokinetic parameters compared with oral VRD suspension. Confocal laser scanning microscopy images were used to confirm enhanced diffusion release of VRD in rat skin. The results showed that the optimized formula produced nanoethosomes with an average size of 128 nm and an entrapment efficiency of 76.23%. VRD-NE provided a significant improvement in permeation with an enhancement ratio of 3.05-fold for a film made with optimally formulated VRD-NE compared with a film made with VRD powder. The transdermal bioavailability of VRD from the nanoethosome film was approximately twofold higher than the oral bioavailability from an aqueous suspension. VRD-NE thus provide a promising transdermal drug delivery system. As a result, management of impotence for a longer duration could be achieved with a reduced dosage rate that improves patient tolerability and compliance for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 44 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 11% |
| Researcher | 3 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 13 | 30% |
| Unknown | 5 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 21 | 48% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 10 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 2015.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#1,754
of 2,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,307
of 294,811 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#85
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 294,811 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.