Table 6.
Formulations | Flux (μg/cm2/h) | Lag Time (h) | Kp (cm/h) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Uninfected Skin | Infected Skin | Uninfected Skin | Infected Skin | Uninfected Skin | Infected Skin | |
AmB-CH-TPP nanoparticles | 0.06 ± 0.002 | 0.12 ± 0.005 | 20 ± 0.1 | 19.8 ± 0.3 | 1.8 × 10−5 ± 0.05 × 10−5 | 3.15 × 10−5 ± 0.15 × 10−5 |
AmB-CH-Dex nanoparticles | 0.04 ± 0.002 | 0.09 ± 0.002 | 20.5 ± 0.1 | 20.3 ± 0.02 | 0.9 × 10−5 ± 0.05 × 10−5 | 2.3 × 10−5 ± 0.06 × 10−5 |
AmB solution | 0 | 0 |
Data expressed as mean ± SD, n = 5. Statistically significant differences of flux and Kp were observed between uninfected and infected skin for both formulations (p < 0.05 by t-test). No statistically significant difference of lag time was observed between uninfected and infected skin for both formulations (p > 0.05 by using t-test). AmB-CH-TPP nanoparticles (Size = 65 ± 8 nm, Zeta potential = 25.5 ± 1 mV) or AmB-CH-Dex nanoparticles (Size = 170 ± 8 nm, Zeta potential = −13 ± 1 mV).