Morihara M, Aoyagi N, Kaniwa N, Katori N, Kojim S
National Institute of Health Sciences, 1-18-1 Kamiyoga, Setagaya-Ku, Tokyo 158-8501, Japan.
Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2002 Jul;28(6):655-62. doi: 10.1081/ddc-120003856.
We investigated the hydrodynamic flows around tablets during several pharmacopeial dissolution tests: the rotating basket (RB), paddle (PD), flow-through cell (FT), and disintegration (DI) tests. The determination of hydrodynamic flow was based on the dissolution rate of United States Pharmacopeial salicylic acid nondisintegrating calibrators, and showed that, compared with the PD and RB methods, the FT method produced a lower hydrodynamic flow value whereas the DI method produced a higher value. The hydrodynamic flows during the PD and RB tests appeared to be similar at the same rotational speed, although the flow patterns around the tablet differed; with the RB method, homogeneous dissolution occurred from all surfaces of the tablet, while with the PD method, dissolution from the lower surface was slower. The use of a sinker seemed to enhance dissolution from the lower surface. Such differences in hydrodynamic flow could explain the apparently different dissolution behaviors of disintegrating prednisone and nondisintegrating acetaminophen tablets when assessed by the PD and RB methods. These differences in hydrodynamic flow between in vitro tests should be considered when choosing dissolution tests for studying in vitro/in vivo relationships and for quality control purposes.
转篮法(RB)、桨法(PD)、流通池法(FT)和崩解试验(DI)。流体动力学流动的测定基于美国药典水杨酸不崩解校准品的溶出速率,结果表明,与PD法和RB法相比,FT法产生的流体动力学流动值较低,而DI法产生的值较高。在相同转速下,PD试验和RB试验中的流体动力学流动似乎相似,尽管片剂周围的流动模式不同;采用RB法时,片剂所有表面均发生均匀溶出,而采用PD法时,下表面的溶出较慢。使用沉降片似乎能增强下表面的溶出。当通过PD法和RB法评估时,流体动力学流动的这种差异可以解释崩解型泼尼松片和不崩解型对乙酰氨基酚片明显不同的溶出行为。在选择溶出度试验以研究体外/体内关系和用于质量控制目的时,应考虑这些体外试验之间流体动力学流动的差异。