Pharmaceutical Research

, Volume 32, Issue 9, pp 2950–2959 | Cite as

Particle Image Velocimetry Evaluation of Fluid Flow Profiles in USP 4 Flow-Through Dissolution Cells

  • Hiroyuki YoshidaEmail author
  • Akemi Kuwana
  • Hiroko Shibata
  • Ken-ichi Izutsu
  • Yukihiro Goda
Research Paper



To evaluate fluid flow profiles in the flow-through cell (FTC, USP apparatus 4) system with pulsatile and non-pulsatile pumps.


Instantaneous velocity vectors in the dissolution cells were obtained from images sequentially captured by a particle image velocimetry (PIV) system. The data were sorted to follow the pump pulse cycle.


The analysis showed changes in the flow profiles during a pump pulse (0.5 s) at a 0.025-s interval in two sizes of cells installed in the FTC system. Supplying a slow flow from the pulsatile pump induced instantaneous downward (inner layer) and upward (outer layer) flow in the larger cell during the suction phase. Analysis at varied medium and cell temperatures strongly suggested a contribution of natural convection to the complex flow caused by relatively high cell temperature. Uniform upward flow was observed in other cells and flow rate conditions. The time-averaged vertical velocities in the cells were similar in the pulsatile and non-pulsatile pump systems.


The PIV analysis provides information on how flow rate and pump pulse affect fluid flow profiles at multiple points in flow-through dissolution cells. An appropriate temperature control should reduce the complex flow of the medium in the FTC system.


dissolution testing flow-through cell system hydrodynamics particle image velocimetry pulsatile pump 



Computational fluid dynamics


European Pharmacopoeia


Flow-through cell


Inside diameter


Japanese Pharmacopoeia


Magnetic resonance imaging


Particle imaging velocimetry


Processing phase time


Time phase of pump


United States Pharmacopeia



This work is partly supported by a Health and Labour Sciences Research Grant from the Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare of Japan.

Supplementary material


(MP4 4488 kb)


(MP4 5801 kb)


  1. 1.
    Moller H, Wirbitzki E. Regulatory aspects of modified release dosage forms: special cases of dissolution testing using the flow-through system. Boll Chim Farm. 1993;132(4):105–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fotaki N, Reppas C. The Flow Through Cell Methodology in the Evaluation of Intralumenal Drug Release Characteristics. Dissolut Technol. 2005;12(2):17–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gao Z. In vitro dissolution testing with flow-through method: a technical note. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2009;10(4):1401–5.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bielen N. Performance of USP calibrator tablets in flow-through cell apparatus. Int J Pharm. 2002;233(1–2):123–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eaton JW, Tran D, Hauck WW, Stippler ES. Development of a performance verification test for USP apparatus 4. Pharm Res. 2012;29(2):345–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kamba M, Seta Y, Takeda N, Hamaura T, Kusai A, Nakane H, et al. Measurement of agitation force in dissolution test and mechanical destructive force in disintegration test. Int J Pharm. 2003;250(1):99–109.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Morihara M, Aoyagi N, Kaniwa N, Katori N, Kojim S. Hydrodynamic flows around tablets in different pharmacopeial dissolution tests. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2002;28(6):655–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wennergren B, Lindberg J, Nicklasson M, Nilsson G, Nyberg G, Ahlgren R, et al. A collaborative in vitro dissolution study: comparing the flow-through method with the USP paddle method using USP prednisone calibrator tablets. Int J Pharm. 1989;53(1):35–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bai G, Wang Y, Armenante PM. Velocity profiles and shear strain rate variability in the USP Dissolution Testing Apparatus 2 at different impeller agitation speeds. Int J Pharm. 2011;403(1–2):1–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Baxter JL, Kukura J, Muzzio FJ. Shear-induced variability in the United States Pharmacopeia Apparatus 2: modifications to the existing system. AAPS J. 2005;7(4):E857–864.PubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baxter JL, Kukura J, Muzzio FJ. Hydrodynamics-induced variability in the USP apparatus II dissolution test. Int J Pharm. 2005;292(1–2):17–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kukura J, Arratia PE, Szalai ES, Muzzio FJ. Engineering tools for understanding the hydrodynamics of dissolution tests. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2003;29(2):231–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kukura J, Baxter JL, Muzzio FJ. Shear distribution and variability in the USP Apparatus 2 under turbulent conditions. Int J Pharm. 2004;279(1–2):9–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McCarthy LG, Bradley G, Sexton JC, Corrigan OI, Healy AM. Computational fluid dynamics modeling of the paddle dissolution apparatus: agitation rate, mixing patterns, and fluid velocities. AAPS Pharm Sci Tech. 2004;5(2):e31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kakhi M. Mathematical modeling of the fluid dynamics in the flow-through cell. Int J Pharm. 2009;376(1–2):22–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kakhi M. Classification of the flow regimes in the flow-through cell. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2009;37(5):531–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    D’Arcy DM, Liu B, Bradley G, Healy AM, Corrigan OI. Hydrodynamic and species transfer simulations in the USP 4 dissolution apparatus: considerations for dissolution in a low velocity pulsing flow. Pharm Res. 2010;27(2):246–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    D’Arcy DM, Liu B, Corrigan OI. Investigating the effect of solubility and density gradients on local hydrodynamics and drug dissolution in the USP 4 dissolution apparatus. Int J Pharm. 2011;419(1–2):175–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shiko G, Gladden LF, Sederman AJ, Connolly PC, Butler JM. MRI studies of the hydrodynamics in a USP 4 dissolution testing cell. J Pharm Sci. 2011;100(3):976–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shiko G, Sederman AJ, Gladden LF. MRI technique for the snapshot imaging of quantitative velocity maps using RARE. J Magn Reson. 2012;216:183–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Brown W. Apparatus 4 Flow Through Cell: Some Thoughts on Operational Characteristics. Dissolut Technol. 2005;12(2):28–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cammarn SR, Sakr A. Predicting dissolution via hydrodynamics: salicylic acid tablets in flow through cell dissolution. Int J Pharm. 2000;201(2):199–209.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    D’Arcy DM, Liu B, Persoons T, Corrigan OI. Hydrodynamic Complexity Induced by the Pulsing Flow Field in USP Dissolution Apparatus 4. Dissolut Technol. 2011;18(4):6–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fotaki N. Flow-Through Cell Apparatus (USP Apparatus 4): Operation and Features. Dissolut Technol. 2011;18(4):46–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hiroyuki Yoshida
    • 1
    Email author
  • Akemi Kuwana
    • 1
  • Hiroko Shibata
    • 1
  • Ken-ichi Izutsu
    • 1
  • Yukihiro Goda
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of DrugsNational Institute of Health SciencesTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations