Cargando…

Delivery Strategies for Skin: Comparison of Nanoliter Jets, Needles and Topical Solutions

Drug diffusion within the skin with a needle-free micro-jet injection (NFI) device was compared with two well-established delivery methods: topical application and solid needle injection. A permanent make-up (PMU) machine, normally used for dermal pigmentation, was utilized as a solid needle injecti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cu, Katharina, Bansal, Ruchi, Mitragotri, Samir, Fernandez Rivas, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7329764/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31617044
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10439-019-02383-1
_version_ 1783552963802824704
author Cu, Katharina
Bansal, Ruchi
Mitragotri, Samir
Fernandez Rivas, David
author_facet Cu, Katharina
Bansal, Ruchi
Mitragotri, Samir
Fernandez Rivas, David
author_sort Cu, Katharina
collection PubMed
description Drug diffusion within the skin with a needle-free micro-jet injection (NFI) device was compared with two well-established delivery methods: topical application and solid needle injection. A permanent make-up (PMU) machine, normally used for dermal pigmentation, was utilized as a solid needle injection method. For NFIs a continuous wave (CW) laser diode was used to create a bubble inside a microfluidic device containing a light absorbing solution. Each method delivered two different solutions into ex vivo porcine skin. The first solution consisted of a red dye (direct red 81) and rhodamine B in water. The second solution was direct red 81 and rhodamine B in water and glycerol. We measured the diffusion depth, width and surface area of the solutions in all the injected skin samples. The NFI has a higher vertical dispersion velocity of 3 × 10(5)μm/s compared to topical (0.1 μm/s) and needle injection (53 μm/s). The limitations and advantages of each method are discussed, and we conclude that the micro-jet injector represents a fast and minimally invasive injection method, while the solid needle injector causes notable tissue damage. In contrast, the topical method had the slowest diffusion rate but causes no visible damage to the skin. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10439-019-02383-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7329764
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73297642020-07-07 Delivery Strategies for Skin: Comparison of Nanoliter Jets, Needles and Topical Solutions Cu, Katharina Bansal, Ruchi Mitragotri, Samir Fernandez Rivas, David Ann Biomed Eng Biomaterials - Engineering Cell Behavior Drug diffusion within the skin with a needle-free micro-jet injection (NFI) device was compared with two well-established delivery methods: topical application and solid needle injection. A permanent make-up (PMU) machine, normally used for dermal pigmentation, was utilized as a solid needle injection method. For NFIs a continuous wave (CW) laser diode was used to create a bubble inside a microfluidic device containing a light absorbing solution. Each method delivered two different solutions into ex vivo porcine skin. The first solution consisted of a red dye (direct red 81) and rhodamine B in water. The second solution was direct red 81 and rhodamine B in water and glycerol. We measured the diffusion depth, width and surface area of the solutions in all the injected skin samples. The NFI has a higher vertical dispersion velocity of 3 × 10(5)μm/s compared to topical (0.1 μm/s) and needle injection (53 μm/s). The limitations and advantages of each method are discussed, and we conclude that the micro-jet injector represents a fast and minimally invasive injection method, while the solid needle injector causes notable tissue damage. In contrast, the topical method had the slowest diffusion rate but causes no visible damage to the skin. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10439-019-02383-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer International Publishing 2019-10-15 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7329764/ /pubmed/31617044 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10439-019-02383-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Biomaterials - Engineering Cell Behavior
Cu, Katharina
Bansal, Ruchi
Mitragotri, Samir
Fernandez Rivas, David
Delivery Strategies for Skin: Comparison of Nanoliter Jets, Needles and Topical Solutions
title Delivery Strategies for Skin: Comparison of Nanoliter Jets, Needles and Topical Solutions
title_full Delivery Strategies for Skin: Comparison of Nanoliter Jets, Needles and Topical Solutions
title_fullStr Delivery Strategies for Skin: Comparison of Nanoliter Jets, Needles and Topical Solutions
title_full_unstemmed Delivery Strategies for Skin: Comparison of Nanoliter Jets, Needles and Topical Solutions
title_short Delivery Strategies for Skin: Comparison of Nanoliter Jets, Needles and Topical Solutions
title_sort delivery strategies for skin: comparison of nanoliter jets, needles and topical solutions
topic Biomaterials - Engineering Cell Behavior
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7329764/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31617044
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10439-019-02383-1
work_keys_str_mv AT cukatharina deliverystrategiesforskincomparisonofnanoliterjetsneedlesandtopicalsolutions
AT bansalruchi deliverystrategiesforskincomparisonofnanoliterjetsneedlesandtopicalsolutions
AT mitragotrisamir deliverystrategiesforskincomparisonofnanoliterjetsneedlesandtopicalsolutions
AT fernandezrivasdavid deliverystrategiesforskincomparisonofnanoliterjetsneedlesandtopicalsolutions