Wo Yan, Zhang Zhen, Zhang Yixin, Wang Danru, Pu Zheming, Su Weijie, Qian Yunliang, Li Yunwu, Cui Daxiang
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai JiaoTong University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200011, China.
J Nanosci Nanotechnol. 2011 Sep;11(9):7840-7. doi: 10.1166/jnn.2011.4741.
With the aim of comparing scar penetration efficiency and retention between ethosomes and deformable liposomes both encapsulated with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), the 5-FU ethosomal suspensions (5-FU ES, 81.74 +/- 9.37 nm) and the 5-FU Deformable Liposomal Suspensions (5-FU DS, 73.7 +/- 9.45 nm) were prepared respectively by Touitou method and Cevc method, their sizes were determined by Particle Sizer System (PSS), and their entrapment Efficiency (EE) was detected by ultracentrifugation and microcolumn centrifugation. Their transdermal delivery experiments were done in hypertrophic scars in vitro. The permeated amount of 5-FU and retention contents of 5-FU were both calculated by High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC). Fluorescence intensities of ES and DS labeled with Rodanmin 6GO (Rho) were measured by Laser Scanning Microscopy (LSM). The control groups such as the 5-FU and empty ethosomal vesicles (5-FU + EEV), the 5-FU and empty deformable liposomal vesicles (5-FU + EDV) and 5-FU PBS Solution (5-FU Sol) were set up. Results showed that, prepared 5-FU ES was 81.74 +/- 9.37 nm in size, 5-FU DS was 73.7 +/- 9.45 nm, EE of 5-FU ES was 10.95%, EE of 5-FU DS was 15.05%. Within 24 hours, in the group of 5-FU ES, the penetration amount of 5-FU in scar was 14.12 +/- 0.1 microg/mL/cm2, the retention contents of 5-FU was 10.74 +/- 1.17 microg/cm2, and the fluorescence intensity of Rho in hypertrophic scar tissues were 182 +/- 18.3; in the group of 5-FU DS: the penetration amount of 5-FU was 12.35 +/- 1.21 microg/mLcm2; the retention contents of 5-FU was 17.48 +/- 0.82 microg/cm2, and the fluorescence intensity of Rho was 241.45 +/- 7.63; there existed statistical difference between penetration amount in the group of 5-FU ES and that in the group of 5-FU DS as well as control groups (P < 0.05, P < 0.01), the penetration amount in the group of ES is markedly higher than DS group or control groups. Conversely, the retention contents of 5-FU and the fluorescence intensity of Rho in DS group were higher than those in ES group and control groups (P < 0.05, P < 0.01). In conclusion, both ES and DS could deliver 5-FU into the hypertrophic scars effectively. ES has better permeability of 5-FU than DS, DS has higher entrapment efficiency of 5-FU, and more 5-FU deposition in hypertrophic scar than ES. We should select ES or DS encapsulated with 5-FU according to clinical demand for hypertrophic scar therapy.
为比较包裹5-氟尿嘧啶(5-FU)的醇质体和变形脂质体的瘢痕渗透效率及滞留情况,分别采用Touitou法和Cevc法制备了5-FU醇质体混悬液(5-FU ES,81.74±9.37 nm)和5-FU变形脂质体混悬液(5-FU DS,73.7±9.45 nm),用粒度分析仪系统(PSS)测定其粒径,采用超速离心法和微柱离心法检测其包封率(EE)。在体外增生性瘢痕上进行其透皮给药实验。采用高效液相色谱法(HPLC)计算5-FU的渗透量和滞留量。用激光扫描显微镜(LSM)测定罗丹明6GO(Rho)标记的ES和DS的荧光强度。设立5-FU与空白醇质体囊泡(5-FU+EEV)、5-FU与空白变形脂质体囊泡(5-FU+EDV)和5-FU PBS溶液(5-FU Sol)等对照组。结果显示,制备的5-FU ES粒径为81.74±9.37 nm,5-FU DS粒径为73.7±9.45 nm,5-FU ES的包封率为10.95%,5-FU DS的包封率为15.05%。24小时内,在5-FU ES组,瘢痕中5-FU的渗透量为14.12±0.1μg/mL/cm2,5-FU的滞留量为10.74±1.17μg/cm2,增生性瘢痕组织中Rho的荧光强度为182±18.3;在5-FU DS组:5-FU的渗透量为12.35±1.21μg/mL/cm2;5-FU的滞留量为17.48±0.82μg/cm2,Rho的荧光强度为241.45±7.63;5-FU ES组的渗透量与5-FU DS组及各对照组之间存在统计学差异(P<0.05,P<0.01),ES组的渗透量明显高于DS组或各对照组。相反,DS组5-FU的滞留量和Rho的荧光强度高于ES组和各对照组(P<0.05,P<0.01)。综上所述,ES和DS均可有效地将5-FU递送至增生性瘢痕中。ES对5-FU的渗透性优于DS,DS对5-FU的包封率更高,且增生性瘢痕中5-FU的沉积比ES更多。对于增生性瘢痕治疗,应根据临床需求选择包裹5-FU的ES或DS。