| Title |
Ethosomal nanocarriers: the impact of constituents and formulation techniques on ethosomal properties, in vivo studies, and clinical trials
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s105016 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ibrahim M Abdulbaqi, Yusrida Darwis, Nurzalina Abdul Karim Khan, Reem Abou Assi, Arshad A Khan |
| Abstract |
Ethosomal systems are novel lipid vesicular carriers containing a relatively high percentage of ethanol. These nanocarriers are especially designed for the efficient delivery of therapeutic agents with different physicochemical properties into deep skin layers and across the skin. Ethosomes have undergone extensive research since they were invented in 1996; new compounds were added to their initial formula, which led to the production of new types of ethosomal systems. Different preparation techniques are used in the preparation of these novel carriers. For ease of application and stability, ethosomal dispersions are incorporated into gels, patches, and creams. Highly diverse in vivo models are used to evaluate their efficacy in dermal/transdermal delivery, in addition to clinical trials. This article provides a detailed review of the ethosomal systems and categorizes them on the basis of their constituents to classical ethosomes, binary ethosomes, and transethosomes. The differences among these systems are discussed from several perspectives, including the formulation, size, ζ-potential (zeta potential), entrapment efficiency, skin-permeation properties, and stability. This paper gives a detailed review on the effects of ethosomal system constituents, preparation methods, and their significant roles in determining the final properties of these nanocarriers. Furthermore, the novel pharmaceutical dosage forms of ethosomal gels, patches, and creams are highlighted. The article also provides detailed information regarding the in vivo studies and clinical trials conducted for the evaluation of these vesicular systems. |
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) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 483 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 482 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 57 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 52 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 36 | 7% |
| Researcher | 23 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 21 | 4% |
| Other | 83 | 17% |
| Unknown | 211 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 122 | 25% |
| Chemistry | 32 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 24 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 19 | 4% |
| Other | 42 | 9% |
| Unknown | 225 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 13 September 2022.
All research outputs
#6,875,368
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#711
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,311
of 311,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#20
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
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 311,866 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.