Skip to main content
PMC home page
AAPS PharmSciTech logoLink to AAPS PharmSciTech
. 2002 May 30;3(2):16–25. doi: 10.1208/pt030208

Viscoelastic evaluation of topical creams containing microcrystalline cellulose/sodium carboxymethyl cellulose as stabilizer

Moji Christianah Adeyeye 1, Ashwinkumar C Jain 1, Mohamed K M Ghorab 1, William J Reilly 2
PMCID: PMC2750310  PMID: 12916945

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the viscoelastic properties of topical creams containing various concentrations of microcrystalline cellulose and sodium carboxymethyl cellulose (Avicel® CL-611) as a stabilizer. Avicel CL-611 was used at 4 different levels (1%, 2%, 4%, and 6% dispersion) to prepare topical creams, and hydrocortisone acetate was used as a model drug. The viscoelastic properties such as loss modulus (G), storage modulus (G), and loss tangent (tan δ) of these creams were measured using a TA Instruments AR 1000 Rheometer and compared to a commercially available formulation. Continuous flow test to determine the yield stress and thixotropic behavior, and dynamic mechanical tests for determining the linear viscosity time sweep data, were performed. Drug release from the various formulations was studied using an Enhancer TM Cell assembly. Formulations containing 1% and 2% Avicel CL-611 had relative viscosity, yield stress, and thixotropic values that were similar to those of the commercial formulation. The elastic modulus (G) of the 1% and 2% formulation was relatively high and did not cross the loss modulus (G), indicating that the gels were strong. In the commercial formulation,G increased after preshearing and broke down after 600 seconds. The strain sweep tests showed that for all formulations containing Avicel CL-611, theG was aboveG with a good distance between them. The gel strength and the predominance ofG can be ranked 6%>4%>2%. The strain profiles for the 1% and 2% formulations were similar to those of the commercial formulation. The δ values for the 1% and 2% formulations were similar, and the formulations containing 4% Avicel CL-611 had lower δ values, indicating greater elasticity. Drug release from the commercial preparation was fastest compared to the formulations prepared using Avicel CL-611, a correlation with the viscoelastic properties. It was found that viscoelastic data, especially the strain sweep profiles of products containing Avicel CL-611 1% and 2%, correlated with the commercial formulation. Rheological tests that measure the viscosity, yield stress, thixotropic behavior, other oscillatory parameters such asG andG are necessary tools in predicting performance of semisolids.

Key Words: Viscoelastic, Microstructure, Cream, Avicel CL-611, Hydrocortisone acetate, Storage modulus, Loss modulus, Thixotropic, Bridging flocculation

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (526.0 KB).

References

  • 1.Smith AK, Goff HD, Kakuda Y. Microstructure and rheological properties of whipped cream as affected by heat treatment and addition of stabilizer. Int Dairy J. 2000;10(4):295–301. doi: 10.1016/S0958-6946(00)00043-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Eccleston GM, Behan-Martin MK, Jones GR, Towns-Andrew E. Synchrotron X-ray investigations into lamellar gel phase formed in pharmaceutical creams prepared with cetrimide and fatty alcohols. Int J Pharm. 2000;203(1–2):127–139. doi: 10.1016/S0378-5173(00)00447-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Dickinson E, Golding M. Influence of calcium ions on creaming and theology of emulsions containing sodium caseinate. Colloids Surf. A. 1998;144(1–3):167–177. doi: 10.1016/S0927-7757(98)00573-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Dickinson E, Golding M. Rheology of sodium caseinate stabilized oil-in-water emulsions. J Colloid Interface Sci. 1997;19(1):166–176. doi: 10.1006/jcis.1997.4939. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Teo YH, Goddard P, Barrett DA, Melia CD. The microstructure of creams revealed by confocal laser scanning microscopy. J Pharm Pharmacol. 1998;50(suppl):132–132. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Regola A, Carnesi M, Dolfini A, Gazzaniga A. Use of thermogravimetry in the physicochemical characterization of hydrophilic creams. Boll Chim Farm. 1996;135(2):67–71. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Caldwell KB, Goff HD, Stanley D. A low-temperature scanning electron microscopy study of ice cream: II. Influence of selected ingredients and processes. Food Struct. 1992;11(1):11–23. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Holland SJ, Warrack JK. Low-temperature scanning electron microscopy of the phase inversion process in a cream formulation. Int J Pharm. 1990;65(3):225–234. doi: 10.1016/0378-5173(90)90147-V. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Niemi L, Laine E. Effect of water content on the microstructure of an o/w cream. Int J Pharm. 1991;68(1–3):205–214. doi: 10.1016/0378-5173(91)90143-C. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Tiemessen HLGM, Van der Maarel JRC, Bodde HE, Jousma H, Jinginger HE. Probing the microstructure of liquid crystalline surfactant systems: a physicochemical study using the rheometry, DTA and oxygen-17 NMR. Neth J Controlled Release. 1990;13(1):73–81. doi: 10.1016/0168-3659(90)90076-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Radebaugh GW. Rheological and mechanical properties of dispersed Ssystems. In: Liberman HA, Rieger MM, Banker GS, editors. Pharmaceutical Dosage Forms: Disperse Systems. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker; 1996. pp. 153–209. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Jones DS, Woolfson AD, Brown AF. Viscoelastic properties of bioadhesive, chlorhexidine-containing semisolids for topical application to the oropharynx. Pharm Res. 1998;15:1131–1136. doi: 10.1023/A:1011906917084. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Tamburic S, Craig DQ, Vuleta G, Milic J. An investigation into the use of thermorheology and texture analysis in the evaluation of w/o creams stabilized with a silicone emulsifier. Pharm Dev Technol. 1996;1:299–306. doi: 10.3109/10837459609022599. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Yu DM, Amidon GL, Weiner ND, Goldberg AH. Viscoelastic properties of Poly(ethylene oxide) solution. J Pharm Sci. 1994;83:1443–1449. doi: 10.1002/jps.2600831016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Gasperlin M, Tusar L, Tusar M, Kristl J, Smid-Korbar J. Lipophilic semisolid emulsion systems: viscoelastic behavior and prediction of physical stability by neural network. Int J Pharm. 1998;168:243–254. doi: 10.1016/S0378-5173(98)00099-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Dolz M, Roldan C. The influence of heating time on the rheological behavior of a microcrystalline cellulose hydrogel. Pharmazie. 1992;47:134–136. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Avicel RC/CL Microcrystalline Cellulose and Carboxymethylcellulose Sodium, NF. Bulletin RC-16, FMC Corporation. 1988: 3.
  • 18.Villivalam VD, Rege PR, Collins CC. Development in release testing of topical dosage forms: use of the Enhancer Cell™ with automated sampling. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 1998;17:1225–1233. doi: 10.1016/S0731-7085(97)00184-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Henderson NL, Meer PM, Kostenbauder HB. Approximate rates of shear encountered in some pharmaceutical processes. J Pharm Sci. 1961;50:788–791. doi: 10.1002/jps.2600500920. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Rohn CL. The rheology of coatings and dispersions. J. Water-borne Coatings. 1987;10(3):12–17. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Lippacher A, Muller RH, Mader K. Investigation on the viscoelastic properties of lipid-based colloidal drug carriers. Int J Pharm. 2000;196:227–230. doi: 10.1016/S0378-5173(99)00428-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Ulbrich R. Rheology of liquids and viscoelastic characterization of semisolids, TA Instruments. Paper presented at: Duquesne University Pharmaceutical Seminar Series: Pharmaceutical Unit Processes and Liquid Dosage Form Development: Industry and Regulatory Perspectives: May 22–25, 2000; Pittsburgh, PA.

Articles from AAPS PharmSciTech are provided here courtesy of American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists

RESOURCES