Surface 1.091 0.01 11.14 0.25 F5 23.16 0.38 0.734

Surfacemorphology of the lansoprazole microspheres were shown in Figure 6.

Particlesurface of formulation F1 were slightly rough but spherical and F2 and F3 weresmooth, oval and discrete. The smoothness of the surface increases withincrease in the polymer ratio. Very less particulate matter of the drug wereseen on the surface of the microsphere indicating uniform distribution of thedrug in the polymer network. Figure 6 Scanning electron photomicrographTable 6 in vitro release data onlansoprazole microspheres TIME (hrs) F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 1 11.4 10.38 0.3 8.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

53 0.4 7.70 0.4 7.07 0.

2 6.58 0.5 2 19.6 0.

8 14.4 0.4 13.

3 0.2 11.8 0.4 11.5 1.

0 10.56 0.2 3 27.3 0.3 25.

3 0.5 18.7 0.6 19.4 0.5 18.9 0.6 16.

4 0.3 4 35.2 0.2 42.2 1.2 37.

2 0.7 28.8 0.3 26.3 0.

7 22.4 0.4 5 47.3 0.4 53.4 1.

3 44.9 0.7 34.3 0.4 33.5 0.8 28.

8 0.6 6 63.5 0.6 60.9 0.9 48.

3 0.6 42.4 0.5 41.7 0.9 32.

4 0.9 7 74.9 0.7 69.5 0.8 59.

6 0.2 54.5 1.2 52.5 1.2 44.

9 1.0 8 94.3 0.

8 86.4 0.8 77.

9 0.9 68.8 0.9 66.8 0.9 63.6 1.4 Allvalues are expressed as mean SD, n 3Furthermore,the tablet was formulated out of lansoprazole microparticles.

Prior tocompression, granules were subjected to pharmacotechnical characterisation. Itwas found that all batches showed good flow properties and shown in table 7. Postcompression parameter of lansoprazole tablet like hardness, friability,thickness, weight variation and drug content represented in table 8.  Table 7 Pre-compression parameterof lansoprazole microsphere loaded compressed tablet Formulation code Angle of repose ( ) Bulk density (gm/ ) Tapped density (gm/ ) Hausner’s ratio Compressibility index (%) F1 24.15 0.12 0.740 0.

822 1.110 0.01 12.97 0.52 F2 23.63 0.56 0.

715 0.02 0.805 0.01 1.121 0.02 11.

18 0.42 F3 24.28 0.34 0.766 0.02 0.856 0.01 1.

111 0.01 13.51 0.36 F4 21.07 0.22 0.

697 0.01 0.763 0.02 1.091 0.01 11.14 0.25 F5 23.

16 0.38 0.734 0.01 0.816 0.01 1.114 0.

02 12.04 0.45 F6 22.30 0.42 0.752 0.02 0.

833 0.02 1.101 0.

02 11.72 0.43 F7 23.64 0.54 0.

0621 0.01 0.708 0.

01 1.142 0.01 12.28 0.33 F8 24.16 0.

36 0.638 0.02 0.742 0.02 1.151 0.

01 14.01 0.42 F9 20.

93 0.25 0.657 0.01 0.

740 0.01 1.123 0.02 11.21 0.24 F10 24.73 0.

40 0.685 0.01 0.767 0.01 1.115 0.

02 13.69 0.36     Table 8 Post compression parametersof lansoprazole microsphere loaded compressed tablet Formulation code Hardness (kg/cm3) Friability (%) Thickness (mm) Diameter (mm) Weight Variation (mg) Drug content (%) F1 5.

49 0.53 4.63 12.61 249.

3 98.68 F2 5.56 0.62 4.52 12.

75 250.1 97.96 F3 5.41 0.44 4.

37 12.65 248.6 96.90 F4 5.39 0.57 4.21 13.00 249.

7 97.89 F5 5.48 0.49 4.

36 12.85 248.3 98.23 F6 5.43 0.53 4.25 12.45 248.

7 98.35 F7 5.55 0.60 4.64 12.65 250.2 97.48 F8 5.

54 0.57 4.36 13.01 251.0 96.24 F9 5.51 0.

63 4.73 12.96 248.

2 98.54 F10 5.43 0.59 4.42 13.00 247.

3 97.24  Lansoprazole tabletwere subjected to in vitro drug release. The % cumulative release profile isgiven in table 9.Table 9 in vitro dissolution studyof lansoprazole tablet using phosphate buffer pH 6.8 Time (hrs) F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 2 15.13 2.11 20.

78 3.21 28.40 2.22 30.94 1.

82 35.63 1.12 4 20.

30 1.92 30.12 2.13 35.11 3.21 38.80 2.35 42.

58 2.12 6 28.22 3.12 34.07 3.41 42.

98 1.92 45.78 1.

45 49.59 1.65 8 39.28 2.81 45.84 2.51 53.

17 2.51 58.33 3.12 59.50 2.51 10 51.

32 3.12 58.34 1.34 60.20 3.45 62.28 2.

35 67.47 3.21 12 58.21 1.35 64.09 3.25 69.85 3.

21 72.71 2.65 75.12 1.21 14 65.32 1.

54 75.78 3.12 79.24 3.

41 83.83 3.12 82.25 1.85 16 78.45 3.52 82.

12 1.82 84.41 2.52 89.44 2.

61 88.36 2.51 18 82.

25 2.41 88.10 2.

41 90.21 1.92 95.21 3.51 92.

85 2.35 20 85.35 3.12 91.21 2.

65 93.32 2.21 95.47 1.

72 99.24 2.54  Thekinetic models were used to describe the overall release of drug from thedosage form. Models with the higher correlation coefficient (r2)were judged to be the most appropriate model for the in –vitro release study.The data obtained was tabulated in Table 10.

Table 10 correlation (r2)values in various kinetics models   Formulation code   F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8 F9 F10 Zero order r2 0.987 0.976 0.954 0.962 0.998 0.982 0.973 0.965 0.971 0.989 First order r2 0.982 0.985 0.969 0.975 0.995 0.984 0.975 0.976 0.972 0.985 Higuchi r2 0.973 0.982 0.986 0.979 0.994 0.988 0.989 0.975 0.975 0.992 Koresmeyerpappas (n) 1.542 1.254 1.656 1.412 1.264 1.354 1.354 1.246 1.538 1.654  Table10 revealed that all the values of release rate (r2) of zero orderrelease model were within the range of ( 1.0). Therefore it can be concluded thatdrug release is mainly following the Zero order release.Stability studiesStabilitystudies were performed to determine the storage stability. Optimizedformulation was kept at 400c and 75%RH. Percent cumulative drugrelease and compressive of optimized formulation was determined after differenttime intervals. After 3 months of period, the drug content, friability, andweight gain studies and percentage cumulative drug release showed nosignificant changes and was within limit.CONCLUSIONLansoprazolemicrospheres were successfully prepared by solvent evaporation method usingchitosan polymer. Lansoprazole microspheres were then formulated intocompressed tablet to protect the drug from the acidic environment of thestomach. Lansoprazole tablets formed from chitosan polymer are a promisingapproach to protect the drug from acidic environment.