AAPS PharmSciTech

, Volume 9, Issue 1, pp 197–204 | Cite as

Evaluation of Sterculia foetida Gum as Controlled Release Excipient

  • Amit Ashok Chivate
  • Sushilkumar Sharatchandra Poddar
  • Shajahan Abdul
  • Gaurav Savant
Research Article


The purpose of the research was to evaluate Sterculia foetida gum as a hydrophilic matrix polymer for controlled release preparation. For evaluation as a matrix polymer; characterization of Sterculia foetida gum was done. Viscosity, pH, scanning electronmicrographs were determined. Different formulation aspects considered were: gum concentration (10–40%), particle size (75–420 μm) and type of fillers and those for dissolution studies; pH, and stirring speed were considered. Tablets prepared with Sterculia foetida gum were compared with tablets prepared with Hydroxymethylcellulose K15M. The release rate profiles were evaluated through different kinetic equations: zero-order, first-order, Higuchi, Hixon-Crowell and Korsemeyer and Peppas models. The scanning electronmicrographs showed that the gum particles were somewhat triangular. The viscosity of 1% solution was found to be 950 centipoise and pH was in range of 4–5. Suitable matrix release profile could be obtained at 40% gum concentration. Higher sustained release profiles were obtained for Sterculia foetida gum particles in size range of 76–125 μm. Notable influences were obtained for type of fillers. Significant differences were also observed with rotational speed and dissolution media pH. The in vitro release profiles indicated that tablets prepared from Sterculia foetida gum had higher retarding capacity than tablets prepared with Hydroxymethylcellulose K15M prepared tablets. The differential scanning calorimetry results indicated that there are no interactions of Sterculia foetida gum with diltiazem hydrochloride. It was observed that release of the drug followed through surface erosion and anomalous diffusion. Thus, it could be concluded that Sterculia foetida gum could be used a controlled release matrix polymer.

Key words

controlled-release natural gum Sterculia foetida gum 


  1. 1.
    D. A. Alderman, et al. A review of cellulose ethers in hydrophilic matrices for oral controlled release dosage forms. Int. J. Pharm. 5:1–9 (1984).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    C. D. Melia, et al. Hydrophilic matrix sustained release systems based on polysaccharide carriers. Crit. Rev. Ther. Drug Carr. Syst. 8:395–321 (1991).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    K. V. R. Rao, and K. P. Devi. Swelling controlled release system: recent developments and applications. Int. J. Pharm. 48:1–13 (1998).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    H. Lapidus, and N. G. Lordi. Drug release from compressed hydrophilic matrices. J. Pharm. Sci. 57:1292–01 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Bamba, F. Puisienx, J. P. Marty, and J. T. Carstensen. Release mechanisms in gel forming sustained release preparation. Int. J. Pharm. 2:307–315 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Buri, and E. Doelker. Formulation of extended release tablets II hydrophilic matrices. Pharm. Acta Helv. 55:189–197 (1980).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    E. Doelker, and N. A. Peppas. Water-swollen cellulose derivative in pharmacy. In N. A. Peppas (ed.), Hydrogels in Medicine and Pharmacy. vol 2, CRS Press, Florida, 1987, pp. 115–160.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. M. Taukdar, and J. P. Vercammen. Evaluation of xanthan gum as a hydrophilic matrix for controlled release dosage form preparation. Drug. Dev. Ind. Pharm. 19:1037–1046 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Sujja-areevath, D. C. Munday, P. J. Cox, and K. A. Khan. Release characterization of diclofenac sodium from encapsulated natural gum mini-matrix formulations. Int. J. Pharm. 139:53–62 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    G. M. Hocking. Sterculia foetida. A dictionary of natural products, 2nd ed. Plexus Publishing Inc, Medford, NJ, 1997, pp. 754–55.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    F. Smith, R. Montgomery, and W. A. Hamor. The structure of gum exudates. In F. Smith, and R. Montgomery (eds.), The chemistry of plant gums and mucilage and some related polysaccharides. Reinhold Publishing Corporation, New York, 1959, pp. 291–293.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. M. Talukdar, and R. Kinget. Swelling and drug release behavior of xanthan gum matrix tablets. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 120:63–72 (1995).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J. Sujjaareevath, D. L. Munday, P. J. Cox, and K. A. Khan. Relationship between swelling, erosion and drug release in hydrophilic natural gum mini-matrix formulations. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 6:207–217 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    T. Higuchi. Mechanism of sustained-action medication: theoretical analysis of rate of release of solid drugs dispersed in solid matrices. J. Pharm. Sci. 52:1145–1149 (1963).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    E. Miyoshi, T. Takaya, and K. Nishinari. Gel–sol transition in gellan gum solutions. I. Rheological studies on the effects of salts. Food Hydrocoll. 8:505–527 (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    R. W. Korsmeyer, R. Gurny, E. Doelker, P. Buri, and N. A. Peppas. Mechanisms of solute release from porous hydrophilic polymers. Int. J. Pharm. 15:25–35 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    P. L. Ritger, and N. A. Peppas. A simple equation for description of solute release II. Fickian and anomalous release from swellable devices. J. Control. Release 5:37–42 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Ford, M. Robinstein, and J. Hogan. Propanolol hydrochloride and aminophyline release from matrix tablets containing hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose. Int. J. Pharm. 24:339–350 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    W. I. Higuchi, et al. Analysis of data on the medicament release from ointment. J. Pharm. Sci. 51:802–804 (1962).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    R. Bodmeier, X. Guo, R. E. Sarabia, and P. F. Skultety. The influence of buffer species and strength on diltiazem HCl release from beads coated with the aqueous cationic polymer dispersions, eudragit RS, RL 30D. Pharm. Res. 13:52–56 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    C. Topica, G. Buckton, and J. M. Newton. Factors influencing the mechanism of release from sustained release matrix pellets produced by extrusion/spheronisation. Int. J. Pharm. 92:211–218 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    H. Lapidus, and N. G. Lordi. Drug release from compressed hydrophilic matrices. J. Pharm. Sci. 57:1292–1301 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    L. C. Feely, and S. S. Davis. Influence of polymeric excipients on drug release from hydroxypropylmethyl cellulose matrices. Int. J. Pharm. 44:131–139 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    M. V. S. Varma, A. M. Kaushal, and S. Garg. Influence of micro-environmental pH on the gel layer behavior and release of a basic drug from various hydrophilic matrices. J. Control. Release 103:499–510 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    S. Jamzad, and R. Fassihi. Role of surfactant and pH on dissolution properties of fenofibrate and glipizide—a technical note. AAPS PharmSciTech. 7(2):E33 (2006).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    M. R. Siahi, M. Barzegar-Jalali, F. Monajjemzadeh, F. Ghaffari, and S. Azarmi. Design and evaluation of 1- and 3-layer matrices of verapamil hydrochloride for sustaining its release. AAPS PharmSciTech. 6(4):E626–E632 (2005).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    V. F. Patel, and N. M. Patel. Statistical evaluation of influence of viscosity of polymer and types of filler on dipyridamole release from floating matrix tablets. Indian J. Pharm. Sci. 69:51–57 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amit Ashok Chivate
    • 1
    • 2
  • Sushilkumar Sharatchandra Poddar
    • 1
  • Shajahan Abdul
    • 1
  • Gaurav Savant
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PharmaceuticsPrincipal K. M. Kundnani College of PharmacyMumbaiIndia
  2. 2.MumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations