Advertisement

AAPS PharmSciTech

, 20:138 | Cite as

Application of the Modified Tangential Spray-Fluidized Bed to Produce Nonpareils from Primary Crystals

  • Ramy N. Elsergany
  • Lai Wah Chan
  • Paul Wan Sia HengEmail author
Research Article

Abstract

Coating of fine primary drug particles by a fluidized bed processor has been reported to be potentially challenging. This work aimed to develop a spray layering process to produce nonpareils by a side spray fluid bed with swirling air flow. The first part examined the effects of various parameters for producing lactose nonpareils by using Box-Behnken design. The factors considered were atomizing air pressure, spray rate, and fluidizing air temperature. This was followed by an in-depth investigation on the effects of inlet airflow rate, air temperature, and spray rate on properties of the product, in addition to process optimization. The results indicated a negative correlation between atomizing air pressure and D90 (particle size at 90th percentile in the cumulative undersize plot) as well as span (size distribution). Temperature had a positive correlation with D90 and span while spray rate affected span. Both atomizing air pressure and temperature correlated negatively with span. It was also found that spray rate negatively affected roundness at different coat weight gain levels across the study design space. Inlet airflow rate was found to correlate negatively with roundness at 15%, w/w coat weight gain. The mean useful yield of the optimized runs was about 91%. In the second part of this study, the metformin hydrochloride crystals as starter seeds were converted into nearly spherical shaped spheroids with 1:1 crystals to coat weight deposition over a processing time of about 3.5 h. The processor studied shows promise for direct spheronization of crystals into spherical seeds.

KEY WORDS

Box-Behnken design layering swirling airflow nonpareils fluid bed 

Notes

Funding Information

Financial support was from GEA-NUS PPRL fund N-148-000-008-001. Ramy is a recipient of the National University of Singapore Graduate Research Scholarship. The authors have no other relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Gu L, Liew CV, Heng PWS. Wet spheronization by rotary processing — a multistage single-pot process for producing spheroids. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2004;30:111–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Newton JM. Gastric emptying of multi-particulate dosage forms. Int J Pharm. 2010;395:2–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kállai N, Luhn O, Dredán J, Kovács K, Lengyel M, Antal I. Evaluation of drug release from coated pellets based on isomalt, sugar, and microcrystalline cellulose inert cores. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2010;11:383–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Charoenthai N, Kleinebudde P, Puttipipatkhachorn S. Influence of chitosan type on the properties of extruded pellets with low amount of microcrystalline cellulose. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2007;8:1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alfarsi A, Dillon A, Mcsweeney S, Krüse J, Griffin B, Devine K, et al. Broadband acoustic resonance dissolution spectroscopy (BARDS): a rapid test for enteric coating thickness and integrity of controlled release pellet formulations. Int J Pharm. 2018;544:31–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim KS, Jin SG, Mustapha O, Yousaf AM, Kim DW, Kim YH, et al. Novel fenofibric acid-loaded controlled release pellet bioequivalent to choline fenofibrate-loaded commercial product in beagle dogs. Int J Pharm. 2015;490:273–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Koester M, Thommes M. New insights into the pelletization mechanism by extrusion/spheronization. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2010;11:1549–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sandler N, Rantanen J, Heinamaki J, Romer M, Marvola M, Yliruusi J. Pellet manufacturing by extrusion-spheronization using process analytical technology. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2005;6:174–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tho I, Kleinebudde P, Sande SA. Extrusion/spheronization of pectin-based formulations. I. Screening of important factors. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2001;2:1–9.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chukwumezie BN, Wojcik M, Malak P, Adeyeye MC. Feasibility studies in spheronization and scale-up ibuprofen microparticulates using the rotor disk fluid-bed technology. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2002;3:1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Politis SN, Rekkas DM. Pelletization processes for pharmaceutical applications: a patent review. Recent Pat Drug Deliv Formul. 2011;5:61–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Heng PWS, Wan LSC, Tan YTF. Optimization of spheroid production by centrifugal rotary processing. Int J Pharm. 1996;143:107–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kondo K, Ito N, Niwa T, Danjo K. Design of sustained release fine particles using two-step mechanical powder processing : particle shape modification of drug crystals and dry particle coating with polymer nanoparticle agglomerate. Int J Pharm. 2013;453:523–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sohi H, Sultana Y, Khar RK. Taste masking technologies in oral pharmaceuticals: recent developments and approaches. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2004;30:429–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Xu M, Heng PWS, Liew CV. Evaluation of coat uniformity and taste-masking efficiency of irregular-shaped drug particles coated in a modified tangential spray fluidized bed processor. Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2015;12:1597–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chan LW, Tang ESK, Heng PWS. Comparative study of the fluid dynamics of bottom spray fluid bed coaters. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2006;7:1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ishida M, Uchiyama J, Isaji K, Suzuki Y, Ikematsu Y, Aoki S. A novel approach to a fine particle coating using porous spherical silica as core particles. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2014;9045:1054–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Watano S, Nakamura H, Hamada K, Wakamatsu Y, Tanabe Y, Dave RN, Pfeffer R. Fine particle coating by a novel rotating fluidized bed coater. Powder Technol. 2004;141:172–6.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Heng PWS, Chan LW, Tang ESK. Use of swirling airflow to enhance coating performance of bottom spray fluid bed coaters. Int J Pharm. 2006;327:26–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kaewklum R, Kuprianov VI. Experimental studies on a novel swirling fluidized-bed combustor using an annular spiral air distributor. Fuel. 2010;89:43–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ortega-Casanova J. CFD and correlations of the heat transfer from a wall at constant temperature to an impinging swirling jet. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 2012;55:5836–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Özbey M, Söylemez MS. Effect of swirling flow on fluidized bed drying of wheat grains. Energy Convers Manag. 2005;46:1495–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Algifri AH, Bhardwaj RK, Rao YVN. Heat transfer in turbulent decaying swirl flow in a circular pipe. Int J Heat Mass Transf. 1988;31:1563–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wong PM, Chan LW, Heng PWS. Investigation on side-spray fluidized bed granulation with swirling airflow. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2013;14:211–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yilmaz M, Çomakli Ö, Yapici S. Enhancement of heat transfer by turbulent decaying swirl flow. Energy Convers Manag. 1999;40:1365–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Myers RH, Montgomery DC. Building empirical model. Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments. 3rd ed. New York: Wiley; 2009. p. 13.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Davies WL, Gloor WT Jr. Batch production of pharmaceutical granulations in a fluidized bed I: effects of process variables on physical properties of final granulation. J Pharm Sci. 1971;60:1869–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rambali B, Baert L, Thoné D, Massart DL. Using experimental design to optimize the process parameters in fluidized bed granulation on a semi-full scale. Int J Pharm. 2001;220:149–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schoefer T, Worts O. Control of fluidized bed granulation, estimation of droplet size of atomized binder solution. Arch Pharm Chem Sci. 1977;2:178–93.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wan LSC, Heng PWS, Liew CV. The influence of liquid spray rate and atomizing pressure on the size of spray droplets and spheroids. Int J Pharm. 1995;118:213–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Parikh DM. Introduction. In: Parikh DM, editor. Handbook of pharmaceutical granulation technology. 3rd ed. Ellicott City: CRC Press; 2010. p. 1–5.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Korakianiti ES, Rekkas DM, Dallas PP, Choulis NH. Optimization of the pelletization process in a fluid-bed rotor granulator using experimental design. AAPS PharmSciTech. 2000;1:1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hao J, Zhao Y, Ye M, Liu Z. Influence of temperature on fluidized-bed catalyst attrition behavior. Chem Eng Technol. 2016;39:927–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Iveson SM, Litster JD, Hapgood K, Ennis BJ. Nucleation, growth and breakage phenomena in agitated wet granulation processes: a review. Powder Technol. 2001;117:3–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bouffard J, Dumont H, Bertrand F, Legros R. Optimization and scale-up of a fluid bed tangential spray rotogranulation process. Int J Pharm. 2007;335:54–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Becher R-D, Schlünder E-U. Fluidized bed granulation—the importance of a drying zone for the particle growth mechanism. Chem Eng Process Process Intensif. 1998;37:1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Liew CV, Er DZL, Heng PWS. Air-dictated bottom spray process: impact of fluid dynamics on granule growth and morphology. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2009;35:866–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Yilmaz M, Comakli O, Yapici S, Sara ON. Heat transfer and friction characteristics in decaying swirl flow generated by different radial guide vane swirl generators. Energy Convers Manag. 2003;44:283–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hemati M, Cherif R, Saleh K, Pont V. Fluidized bed coating and granulation: influence of process-related variables and physicochemical properties on the growth kinetics. Powder Technol. 2003;130:18–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tang ESK, Wang L, Liew CV, Chan LW, Heng PWS. Drying efficiency and particle movement in coating — impact on particle agglomeration and yield. Int J Pharm. 2008;350:172–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Andersson KM, Bergström L. Friction and adhesion of single spray-dried granules containing a hygroscopic polymeric binder. Powder Technol. 2005;155:101–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Cavinato M, Franceschinis E, Cavallari S, Realdon N, Santomaso A. Relationship between particle shape and some process variables in high shear wet granulation using binders of different viscosity. Chem Eng J. 2010;164:292–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Bouwman AM, Visser MR, Meesters GMH, Frijlink HW. The use of stokes deformation number as a predictive tool for material exchange behaviour of granules in the ‘equilibrium phase’ in high shear granulation. Int J Pharm. 2006;318:78–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lin X, Chyi CW, Ruan K, Feng Y, Heng PWS. Development of potential novel cushioning agents for the compaction of coated multi-particulates by co-processing micronized lactose with polymers. Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2011;79:406–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lin K, Peck GE. Development of agglomerated talc. I. Evaluation of fluidized bed granulation parameters on the physical properties of agglomerated talc. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1995;21:447–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ramy N. Elsergany
    • 1
  • Lai Wah Chan
    • 1
  • Paul Wan Sia Heng
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.GEA-NUS Pharmaceutical Processing Research Laboratory, Department of PharmacyNational University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations