Abstract
Background: Herbal preparations with low oral bioavailability have a fast first-pass metabolism in the gut and liver. To offset these effects, a method to improve absorption and, as a result, bioavailability must be devised.
Objective: The goal of this study was to design, develop, and assess the in vivo toxicity of polyherbal phytosomes for ovarian cyst therapy.
Methods: Using antisolvent and rotational evaporation procedures, phytosomes containing phosphatidylcholine and a combination of herbal extracts (Saraca asoca, Bauhinia variegata, and Commiphora mukul) were synthesized. For a blend of Saraca asoca, Bauhinia variegata, and Commiphora mukul, Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), preformulation investigations, qualitative phytochemical screening, and UV spectrophotometric tests were conducted. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM), zeta potential, ex vivo release, and in vivo toxicological investigations were used to examine phytosomes.
Results: FTIR studies suggested no changes in descriptive peaks in raw and extracted herbs, although the intensity of peaks was slightly reduced. Zeta potential values between -20.4 mV to - 29.6 mV suggested stable phytosomes with an accepted particle size range. Percentage yield and entrapment efficiency were directly correlated to the amount of phospholipid used. Ex vivo studies suggested that the phytosomes with low content of phospholipids showed good permeation profiles. There was no difference in clinical indications between the extract-loaded phytosomes group and the free extract group in in vivo toxicological or histopathological examinations.
Conclusion: The findings of current research work suggested that the optimized phytosomes based drug delivery containing herbal extracts as bioenhancers has the potential to improve the bioavailability of hydrophobic extracts.
Keywords: Extracts of Saraca asoca, Bauhinia variegata, Commiphora mukul, qualitative phytochemical screening, Phyto-phospholipid complexes (Phytosomes), Ex vivo, in vivo toxicological studies
Graphical Abstract
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/anbr.202200010]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6882-14-511] [PMID: 25524718]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2020.01192] [PMID: 32903374]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/coatings10080761]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mefs.2018.04.005]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.imr.2018.05.003] [PMID: 30271715]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1573406415666190430142637] [PMID: 31208313]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/D2RA00809B] [PMID: 35425017]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.imr.2016.10.002] [PMID: 28462131]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcme.2017.04.006] [PMID: 29321985]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcme.2017.05.005] [PMID: 29322005]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08982104.2020.1800729] [PMID: 32703044]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcme.2017.04.003] [PMID: 29736383]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm7070179] [PMID: 30037150]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ajtcam.v12i2.2]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.31782/IJCRR.2020.122322]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20182890]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajps.2018.05.011] [PMID: 32104457]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics13091475] [PMID: 34575551]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00609]
[PMID: 33944662]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2018.06.042] [PMID: 29933062]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics11060296] [PMID: 31234548]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.2c00472] [PMID: 35559161]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu13103665] [PMID: 34684666]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40199-019-00312-0] [PMID: 31741280]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1574885515666200120124214]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/2043-6254/aadc50]
[PMID: 33953779]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.23880/OAJG-16000148]
[http://dx.doi.org/10.26656/fr.2017.5(1).425]