Open Access


Read more
image01

Online Manuscript Submission


Read more
image01

Submitted Manuscript Trail


Read more
image01

Online Payment


Read more
image01

Online Subscription


Read more
image01

Email Alert



Read more
image01

Review Article | OPEN ACCESS

Bioadhesive Polymeric Platforms for Transmucosal Drug Delivery Systems - a Review

Saroj Kumar Roy , Bala Prabhaka

School of Pharmacy and Technology Management, Narsee Monjee Institute of Management & Higher Studies University, V.L.Mehta road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai, 400 056, India;

For correspondence:-  Saroj Roy   Email: sarojroy79@rediffmail.com   Tel:+9109819223020

Received: 5 July 2009        Accepted: 30 October 2009        Published: 23 February 2010

Citation: Roy SK, Prabhaka B. Bioadhesive Polymeric Platforms for Transmucosal Drug Delivery Systems - a Review. Trop J Pharm Res 2010; 9(1):91-104 doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v9i1.12

© 2010 The authors.
This is an Open Access article that uses a funding model which does not charge readers or their institutions for access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) and the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read), which permit unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited..

Abstract

Of the various routes of drug delivery, the oral route is often preferred by the patient. However, peroral administration of drugs has disadvantages such as hepatic first-pass metabolism and enzymatic degradation within the gastrointestinal tract which constitutes a hindrance to oral administration of certain classes of drugs, especially peptides and proteins. Consequently, other absorptive mucosae are often considered as potential sites for drug administration. Transmucosal routes of drug delivery (i.e., the mucosal linings of the nasal, rectal, vaginal, ocular, and oral cavity) offer distinct advantages over peroral administration for systemic drug delivery. These advantages include possible bypass of first-pass effect, avoidance of presystemic elimination within the GI tract, and, depending on the particular drug, better enzymatic flora for drug absorption. However, the mucosa surface as a site for drug delivery has limitations as well. Other than the low flux associated with mucosal delivery, a major limitation of the transmucosal route of administration is the lack of dosage form retention at the site of absorption. Consequently, bioadhesive polymers have extensively been employed in transmucosal drug delivery systems. If these materials are then incorporated into pharmaceutical formulations, drug absorption by mucosal cells may be enhanced or the drug may be released at the site for an extended period of time.  This review describes various bio/mucoadhesive polymers used in transmucosal drug delivery. Starting with introduction of bioadhesion with theories and mechanism, history, different bioadhesive polymers, characteristics of desired bioadhesive polymers, this article then proceeds to cover the various sites suitable for mucoadhesive drug delivery system followed by the factors affecting bio/ mucoadhesion.

Keywords: Mucosa; Tansmucosal delivery; Bioadhesion; Lectin; Polymers; Thiomer; Fimbrins

Impact Factor
Thompson Reuters (ISI): 0.523 (2021)
H-5 index (Google Scholar): 39 (2021)

Article Tools

Share this article with



Article status: Free
Fulltext in PDF
Similar articles in Google
Similar article in this Journal:

Archives

2024; 23: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2023; 22: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2022; 21: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2021; 20: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2020; 19: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2019; 18: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2018; 17: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2017; 16: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2016; 15: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2015; 14: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2014; 13: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2013; 12: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2012; 11: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2011; 10: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2010; 9: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2009; 8: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2008; 7: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2007; 6: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2006; 5: 
1,   2
2005; 4: 
1,   2
2004; 3: 
1
2003; 2: 
1,   2
2002; 1: 
1,   2

News Updates