Advertisement

Journal of Pharmaceutical Innovation

, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp 143–155 | Cite as

Assessment of Pregelatinized Sorghum and Maize Starches as Superior Multi-functional Excipients

  • Daud Baraka Abdallah
  • Naseem Ahmad CharooEmail author
  • Abubakr Suliman Elgorashi
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

Research exploring pharmaceutical applications of native sorghum and maize crops is needed to improve their economic competitiveness.

Objectives

This work assesses the physicochemical and compressional attributes of pregelatinized sorghum and maize starches originating from Sudan and determines whether these attributes are superior than existing starches in pursuit of achieving quality attributes of pharmaceutical dosage formulations.

Methods

The effects of pregelatinization temperature, starch concentration, and wet massing time were studied in 23 full factorial design. The relevant physical and functional properties such as particle morphology, compressibility index, porosity, particle size distribution, lubricant sensitivity, Heckel and Kawakita plots, and dissolution were systematically examined.

Results

The Hausner ratios (HRs) of unmodified sorghum (1.48) and maize starch (1.39) decreased to 1.22 on pregelatinization. The Heckel parameter of pregelatinized sorghum and maize starches were 29.4 and 17.5, respectively, indicating a high degree of plastic deformation. Low elastic recovery value of 0.29 % indicated low capping and lamination tendency. The coordination number of 8.7 which corresponded to bed voidage of approximately 45 % and Kawakita analysis supported densification by particle rearrangement at low compaction pressures. Swelling power increased fourfold compared to unmodified starches resulting in the faster disintegration of tablets. More than 80 % of drug was released after 10 min from all the formulations. Although lubrication sensitivity values increased marginally, no effect on disintegration time was seen.

Conclusion

The pregelatinized starches mainly sorghum possess superior physical and functional properties and can accommodate minor changes in the formulation composition or process.

Keywords

Compression properties Disintegration time Heckel plot Pregelatinized starch Swelling power 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Khar RK, Vyas PS, Farhan JA, et al. Lachman/Lieberman’s. The Theory and Practice of Industrial Pharmacy, 4 ed. New Delhi: CBS Publishers and Distributors Pvt Ltd.; 2013.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rowe RC, Sheskey PJ, Quinn ME. Handbook of pharmaceutical excipients. 6th ed. London: Pharmaceutical Press; 2009.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Okpanachi GO, Musa H, Isah AB. Physicochemical characterisation of microcrystalline starch derived from Digitaria iburua (Poaceae). Nig J Pharm Sci. 2012;11:66–76.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Subhadhirasakul S, Ketjinda W, Phadoongsombut N. Study on tablet binding and disintegrating properties of alternative starches prepared from taro and sweet potato tubers. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2001;27:81–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Garr JSM, Bangudu AB. Evaluation of sorghum starch as a tablet excipient. Drug Dev Ind Phar. 1991;17(1):1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Odeku OA. Potentials of tropical starches as pharmaceutical excipients: a review. Starch – Stärke. 2013;65(1-2):89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Adebayo SA, Brown-Myrie E, Itiola OA. Comparative disintegrant activities of breadfruit starch and official corn starch. Powder Tech. 2008;181:98–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Adedokun MO, Itiola OA. Disintegrant activities of natural and pregelatinized trifoliate yams, rice and corn starches in paracetamol tablets. J Appl Pharm Sci. 2011;1(10):200–6.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jubril I, Muazu J, Mohammed GT. Effects of phosphate modified and pregelatinized sweet potato starches on disintegrant property of paracetamol tablet formulations. J Appl Pharm Sci. 2012;2(2):32–6.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Satin M. Functional properties of starches. In: Third Intern. Symp. on Tropical Tuber Crops, held in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India; Jan 19–22, 2000.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Udachan IS, Sahu A, Hend F. Extraction and characterization of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) starch. Int Food Res J. 2012;19(1):315–9.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yagoub AE, Suleiman AME, Abdel-Gadir W. Effect of fermentation on the nutritional and microbiological of quality of dough of different sorghum varieties. J Sci Tech. 2009;10(3):109–19.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hamad SH, Dieng MC, Ehrmann MA, et al. Characterization of the bacterial flora of Sudanese sorghum flour and sorghum sourdough. J Appl Microbiol. 1997;83(6):764–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mustafa A, Macmasters M. New varieties of sorghum grain suitable for starch production. Starch-Starke. 1970;22(6):192–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abdallah DB, Charoo NA, Elgorashi AS. Comparative binding and disintegrating property of Echinochloa colona starch (difra starch) against maize, sorghum, and cassava starch. Pharm Biol. 2014;935–943.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Visavarungroj N, Remon JP. An evaluation of hydroxypropyl starch as disintegrant and binder in tablet formulation. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1991;17(10):1389–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Alebiowu G, Itiola OA. Compressional characteristics of native and pregelatinized forms of sorghum, plantain, and corn starches and the mechanical properties of their tablets. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2002;28:663–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Núñez Santiagoa MC, Bello-Pe’reza LA, Tecante A. Swelling-solubility characteristics, granule size distribution and rheological behavior of banana (Musa paradisiaca) starch. Carbohydr Polym. 2004;56:65–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Abdalla AA, Umsalama MA, Abdelhalim AR, et al. Physicochemical characterization of traditionally extracted pearl millet starch (Jir). J Appl Sci Res. 2009;5(11):2016–27.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ohwoavworhua F, Adelakun T, Kunle O. A comparative evaluation of the flow and compaction characteristics of a-cellulose obtained from waste paper. Trop J Pharm Res. 2007;6(1):645–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Achor M, Oyi AR, Isah AB. Some physical characteristics of microcrystalline starch obtained from maize and cassava. Continental J Pharm Sci. 2010;4:11–7.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liu Z. Measuring the angle of repose of granular systems using hollow cylinders. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh; 2011.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wade A, Weller PJ. Handbook of pharmaceutical excipients. London: Pharmaceutical Press; 1994.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zhang Y, Huang Z, Yang C, Huang A, et al. Material properties of partially pregelatinized cassava starch prepared by mechanical activation. Starch-Starke. 2013;65(5‐6):461–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Allen LV, Popovich NG. Ansel’s pharmaceutical dosage forms and drug delivery systems, vol. 306. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    USP36-NF31. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. Rocville 2013Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Alebiowu G, Adeagbo A. Disintegrant properties of a paracetamol tablet formulation lubricated with co-processed lubricants. Farmacia. 2009;57(4):500–10.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Adedokun MO, Itiola OA. Influence of some starch mucilages on compression behaviour and quality parameters of paracetamol tablets. Br J Pharm Res. 2013;3(2):176–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rojas J, Aristizabal J, Henao M. Screening of several excipients for direct compression of tablets: a new perspective based on functional properties. Revista de Ciências Farmacêuticas Básica e Aplicada. 2013;34(1):17–23.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zhang Y, Huo M, Zhou J, et al. DDSolver: an add-in program for modeling and comparison of drug dissolution profiles. AAPS J. 2013;12(3):263–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rippie E, Faiman F, Pramoda M. Segregation of particulate solid systems IV. Effect of particulate shape on energy requirements. J Pharm Sci. 1967;56:1523–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kawakita K, Lüdde KH. Some considerations on powder compression equations. Powder Tech. 1971;4(2):61–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rojas JY, Uribe Y, Zuluaga A. Powder and compaction characteristics of pregelatinized starches. Die Pharmazie. 2012;67(6):513–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Garekani HA, Ford JL, Rubinstein MH, et al. Effect of compression force, compression speed, and particle size on the compression properties of paracetamol. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2001;27:935–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mohan S. Compression physics of pharmaceutical powders: a review. Int J Pharm Sci Res. 2012;3:1580–92.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cumberland DJ, Crawford RJ. The packing of particles, vol. 6. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1987. p. 33.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    German RM. Coordination number changes during powder densification. Powder Tech. 2014;253:368–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Klevan I. Compression analysis of pharmaceutical powders: assessment of mechanical properties and tablet manufacturability prediction. 2011.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Colonna P, Doublier JL, Melcion JP, De Monredon F, Mercier C. Extrusion cooking and drum drying of wheat starch. I. Physical and macromolecular modifications. Cereal Chem. 1984;61:538–42.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bos E, Bolhuis GK, Van Doorne H, et al. Native starch in tablet formulations: properties on compaction. Pharm Weekbl Sci. 1987;9:274–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wong L, Pilpel N. Effect of particle shape on the mixing of powders. J Pharm Pharmacol. 1990;42(1):1–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Defloor I, Dehing I, Delcour JA. Physico-chemical properties of cassava starch. Starch-Starke. 1998;50:58–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Center for Evaluation and Research (CDER). Guidances for industry: Waiver of in vivo bioavailability and bioequivalence studies for immediate-release solid oral dosage forms based on a Biopharmaceutics Classification System. 2000Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Raihan Sarkar MD, Monjur-Al-Hossain ASM, Saiful Islam MD, et al. Effect of hydrophilic swellable polymers on dissolution rate of atorvastatin using simple physical mixing technique. Ind J Novel Drug Del. 2012;4:130–8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daud Baraka Abdallah
    • 1
  • Naseem Ahmad Charoo
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Abubakr Suliman Elgorashi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Pharmaceutics, Faculty of PharmacyAl Ribat UniversityKhartoumSudan
  2. 2.AlFalah Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd.BudgamIndia
  3. 3.Zeno TherapeuticsDubaiUnited Arab Emirates

Personalised recommendations