Epidermal Iontophoresis: I. Development of the Ionic Mobility-Pore Model
- 55 Downloads
Purpose. An integrated ionic mobility-pore model for epidermal iontophoresis is developed from theoretical considerations using both the free volume and pore restriction forms of the model for a range of solute radii (rj) approaching the pore radii (rp) as well as approximation of the pore restriction form for rj /rp < 0.4. In this model, we defined the determinants for iontophoresis as solute size (defined by MV, MW or radius), solute mobility, solute shape, solute charge, the Debye layer thickness, total current applied, solute concentration, fraction ionized, presence of extraneous ions (defined by solvent conductivity), epidermal permselectivity, partitioning rates to account for interaction of unionized and ionized lipophilic solutes with the wall of the pore and electroosmosis.
Methods. The ionic mobility-pore model was developed from theoretical considerations to include each of the determinants of iontophoretic transport. The model was then used to reexamine iontophoretic flux conductivity and iontophoretic flux-fraction ionized literature data on the determinants of iontophoretic flux.
Results. The ionic mobility-pore model was found to be consistent with existing experimental data and determinants defining iontophoretic transport. However, the predicted effects of solute size on iontophoresis are more consistent with the pore-restriction than free volume form of the model. A reanalysis of iontophoretic flux-conductivity data confirmed the model's prediction that, in the absence of significant electroosmosis, the reciprocal of flux is linearly related to either donor or receptor solution conductivity. Significant interaction with the pore walls, as described by the model, accounted for the reported pH dependence of the iontophoretic transport for a range of ionizable solutes.
Conclusions. The ionic mobility-pore iontophoretic model developed enables a range of determinants of iontophoresis to be described in a single unifying equation which recognises a range of determinants of iontophoretic flux.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.P. M. Lai and M. S. Roberts. Iontophoresis. In M. S. Roberts and K. Walters (eds), Dermal Absorption and Toxicity Assessment, Marcel Dekker, New York, 1998, pp. 379-422.Google Scholar
- 2.N. H. Bellantone, S. Rim, M. L. Francoeur, and B. Rasadi. Enhanced percutaneous absorption via iontophoresis. I. Evaluation of an in vitro system and transport of model compounds. Int. J. Pharm. 30:63-72 (1986).Google Scholar
- 5.M. S. Roberts, J. Singh, N. Yoshida, and K. I. Currie. Iontophoretic transport of selected solutes through human epidermis. In R. C. Scott, J. Hadgraft, and R. Guy (eds.), Prediction of Percutaneous Absorption; IBC Technical Services Ltd, London, 1990, pp. 231-241.Google Scholar
- 6.J. B. Phipps and J. R. Gyory. Transdermal ion migration. Adv. Drug Del. Rev. 9:137-176 (1992).Google Scholar
- 9.N. H. Yoshida and M. S. Roberts. Structure-transport relations in transdermal iontophoresis. Adv. Drug Del. Rev. 9:239-264 (1992).Google Scholar
- 10.N. H. Yoshida and M. S. Roberts. Solute molecular size and transdermal iontophoresis across excised human skin. J. Contr. Rel. 25:177-195 (1993).Google Scholar
- 11.S. Dinh, C. W. Luo, and B. Berner. Upper and lower limits of human skin electrical resistance in iontophoresis. AIChE J. 39:2011-2018 (1993).Google Scholar
- 12.S. B. Ruddy and B. A. Hadzija. Iontophoretic permeability of polyethylene glycols through hairless rat skin: application of hydrodynamic theory for hindered transport through liquid-filled pores. Drug Des. Discovery 8:207-224 (1992).Google Scholar
- 14.W. M. Deen. Hindered transport of large molecules in liquidfilled pores. AIChE J. 33:1409-1425 (1987).Google Scholar
- 16.M. G. Davidson and W. M. Deen. Hydrodynamic theory for the hindered transport of flexible macromolecules in porous membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 35:167-192 (1988).Google Scholar
- 17.M. J. Pikal. The role of electroosmotic flow in transdermal iontophoresis. Adv. Drug Del. Rev. 9:201-237 (1992).Google Scholar
- 18.W. D. Munch, L. P. Zestar, and J. L. Anderson. Rejection of polyelectrolytes from microporous membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 5:77-102 (1979).Google Scholar
- 24.B. H. Sage, R. A. Hoke, A. C. McFarland, and K. Kowalczyk. The importance of skin pH in the iontophoresis of peptides. In K. R. Brain, J. Hadgraft, V. J. James, and K. A. Walters (eds), Prediction of Percutaneous Penetration Vol. 3B, 1993.Google Scholar
- 26.S. S. Kamath and L. P. Gangarosa, Sr. Electrophoretic evaluation of the mobility of drugs suitable for iontophoresis. Meth. Find. Exp. Clin. Pharmacol. 17:227-232 (1995).Google Scholar
- 27.M. Polásek, B. Gas, T. Hirokawa, and J. Vacik. Determination of limiting ionic mobilities and dissociation constants of some local anaesthetics. J. Chromatograph. 596:265-270 (1992).Google Scholar
- 28.M. A. Schwarz, R. H. H. Neubert, and H. H. Rüttinger. Application of capillary electrophoresis for characterizing interactions between drugs and bile salts. Part I. J. Chromatograph. A. 745:135-143 (1996).Google Scholar
- 29.P. Gebauer, J. Caslavska, W. Thormann, and P. Bocek. Prediction of zone patterns in capillary zone electrophoresis with conductivity detection. Concept of the zone conductivity diagram. J. Chromatograph. A. 772:63-71 (1997).Google Scholar
- 30.A. Leo, C. Hansch, and D. Elkins. Partition coefficients and their uses. Chem. Rev. 71:525-616 (1971).Google Scholar