The Experts below are selected from a list of 21495 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Rajeev A. Jain - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the manufacturing techniques of various drug loaded biodegradable poly lactide co Glycolide plga devices
Biomaterials, 2000Co-Authors: Rajeev A. JainAbstract:A considerable research has been conducted on drug delivery by biodegradable polymeric devices, following the entry of bioresorbable surgical sutures in the market about two decades ago. Amongst the different classes of biodegradable polymers, the thermoplastic aliphatic poly(esters) like poly(lactide) (PLA), poly(Glycolide) (PGA), and especially the copolymer of lactide and Glycolide, poly(lactide-co-Glycolide) (PLGA) have generated immense interest due to their favorable properties such as good biocompatibility, biodegradability, and mechanical strength. Also, they are easy to formulate into different devices for carrying a variety of drug classes such as vaccines, peptides, proteins, and micromolecules. Also, they have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for drug delivery. This review discusses the various traditional and novel techniques (such as in situ microencapsulation) of preparing various drug loaded PLGA devices, with emphasis on preparing microparticles. Also, certain issues about other related biodegradable polyesters are discussed.
-
The manufacturing techniques of various drug loaded biodegradable poly(lactide-co-Glycolide) (PLGA) devices
Biomaterials, 2000Co-Authors: Rajeev A. JainAbstract:A considerable research has been conducted on drug delivery by biodegradable polymeric devices, following the entry of bioresorbable surgical sutures in the market about two decades ago. Amongst the different classes of biodegradable polymers, the thermoplastic aliphatic poly(esters) like poly(lactide) (PLA), poly(Glycolide) (PGA), and especially the copolymer of lactide and Glycolide, poly(lactide-co-Glycolide) (PLGA) have generated immense interest due to their favorable properties such as good biocompatibility, biodegradability, and mechanical strength. Also, they are easy to formulate into different devices for carrying a variety of drug classes such as vaccines, peptides, proteins, and micromolecules. Also, they have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for drug delivery. This review discusses the various traditional and novel techniques (such as in situ microencapsulation) of preparing various drug loaded PLGA devices, with emphasis on preparing microparticles. Also, certain issues about other related biodegradable polyesters are discussed. Copyright (C) 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd.
L A Carmel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Healing bone using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 and copolymer.
Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 1998Co-Authors: C A Kirker-head, T N Gerhart, S H Schelling, R. Armstrong, L A CarmelAbstract:Middiaphyseal 2.5-cm segmental defects in the right femurs of 12 sheep were stabilized with stainless steel plates and implanted with (1) 2 mg recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 and poly[D,L-(lactide-co-Glycolide)] bioerodible polymer with autologous blood (n = 7), (2) 4 mg recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 and poly[D,L-(lactide-co-Glycolide)] and blood (n = 3), or (3) poly[D,L-(lactide-co-Glycolide)] and blood only (n = 2). Bone healing was evaluated for 1 year using clinical, radiographic, gross pathologic, and histologic techniques. Union occurred in three sheep in Group 1, two in Group 2, and none in Group 3. In the animals that healed, new bone first was visible radiographically between Weeks 2 and 6 after implantation; new bone mineral content equaled that of the intact femur not surgically treated by Week 16; recanalization of the medullary cavity approached completion at Week 52; and at necropsy the surgical treated femurs were rigidly healed, the poly[D,L-(lactide-co-Glycolide)] was resorbed completely, and woven and lamellar bone bridged the defect site. In two Group 1 sheep euthanized at Weeks 2 and 6, polymer particles were permeated by occasional multinucleated giant cells. Some plasma cells, lymphocytes, and neutrophils were present locally. The poly[D,L-(lactide-co-Glycolide)] tended to fragment during surgical implantation. Despite these observations, the recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2/poly[D,L-(lactide-co-Glycolide)] implant was able to heal large segmental bone defects in this demanding model.
J Wozney - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Maxillary alveolar cleft repair in dogs using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 and a polymer carrier.
Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 1996Co-Authors: M. Mayer, Eliora Ron, Jon Hollinger, J WozneyAbstract:Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 was evaluated in maxillary alveolar clefts in 24 adult, skeletally mature Foxhound dogs. Bilateral clefts were prepared, 1 cm in bony width, lined with healthy epithelium with functional teeth on each side, and were expected not to heal spontaneously with new bone. Preparation of bilateral clefts in 24 dogs permitted 48 recipient sites divided evenly among four treatment and two time periods (2 and 4 months), yielding six replicates per treatment per time. The overall goal for the study was to regenerate bone in the cleft using one of three treatments: (2) 200 microgram recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 combined with the copolymer poly(lactide-co-Glycolide) and autogenous blood, (2) poly(lactide-co-Glycolide) and autogenous blood, or (3) an autograft from the posterior iliac crest. A fourth group consisted of untreated alveolar cleft defects. At designated times, dogs were euthanized, and the recipient beds with contiguous bone were recovered, processed, and assessed radiographically and histologically. Autograft-treated defects had more bone than other treatments at 2 months; however, by 4 months, there were no differences among treatments, except for the poly(lactide-co-Glycolide) group, which had the least amount of bone. Response to the recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 may have been suboptimal either because the dose was too low or because the poly(lactide-co-Glycolide)-autogenous blood delivery system did not temporally maintain and spatially position recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 at the recipient bed. In addition, the development of a nonhealing, critical-sized defect in the maxilla of the dog appears to require a more aggressive resection of bone to preclude spontaneous osseous regeneration.
C A Kirker-head - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Healing bone using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 and copolymer.
Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 1998Co-Authors: C A Kirker-head, T N Gerhart, S H Schelling, R. Armstrong, L A CarmelAbstract:Middiaphyseal 2.5-cm segmental defects in the right femurs of 12 sheep were stabilized with stainless steel plates and implanted with (1) 2 mg recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 and poly[D,L-(lactide-co-Glycolide)] bioerodible polymer with autologous blood (n = 7), (2) 4 mg recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 and poly[D,L-(lactide-co-Glycolide)] and blood (n = 3), or (3) poly[D,L-(lactide-co-Glycolide)] and blood only (n = 2). Bone healing was evaluated for 1 year using clinical, radiographic, gross pathologic, and histologic techniques. Union occurred in three sheep in Group 1, two in Group 2, and none in Group 3. In the animals that healed, new bone first was visible radiographically between Weeks 2 and 6 after implantation; new bone mineral content equaled that of the intact femur not surgically treated by Week 16; recanalization of the medullary cavity approached completion at Week 52; and at necropsy the surgical treated femurs were rigidly healed, the poly[D,L-(lactide-co-Glycolide)] was resorbed completely, and woven and lamellar bone bridged the defect site. In two Group 1 sheep euthanized at Weeks 2 and 6, polymer particles were permeated by occasional multinucleated giant cells. Some plasma cells, lymphocytes, and neutrophils were present locally. The poly[D,L-(lactide-co-Glycolide)] tended to fragment during surgical implantation. Despite these observations, the recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2/poly[D,L-(lactide-co-Glycolide)] implant was able to heal large segmental bone defects in this demanding model.
M. Mayer - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Maxillary alveolar cleft repair in dogs using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 and a polymer carrier.
Plastic and reconstructive surgery, 1996Co-Authors: M. Mayer, Eliora Ron, Jon Hollinger, J WozneyAbstract:Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 was evaluated in maxillary alveolar clefts in 24 adult, skeletally mature Foxhound dogs. Bilateral clefts were prepared, 1 cm in bony width, lined with healthy epithelium with functional teeth on each side, and were expected not to heal spontaneously with new bone. Preparation of bilateral clefts in 24 dogs permitted 48 recipient sites divided evenly among four treatment and two time periods (2 and 4 months), yielding six replicates per treatment per time. The overall goal for the study was to regenerate bone in the cleft using one of three treatments: (2) 200 microgram recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 combined with the copolymer poly(lactide-co-Glycolide) and autogenous blood, (2) poly(lactide-co-Glycolide) and autogenous blood, or (3) an autograft from the posterior iliac crest. A fourth group consisted of untreated alveolar cleft defects. At designated times, dogs were euthanized, and the recipient beds with contiguous bone were recovered, processed, and assessed radiographically and histologically. Autograft-treated defects had more bone than other treatments at 2 months; however, by 4 months, there were no differences among treatments, except for the poly(lactide-co-Glycolide) group, which had the least amount of bone. Response to the recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 may have been suboptimal either because the dose was too low or because the poly(lactide-co-Glycolide)-autogenous blood delivery system did not temporally maintain and spatially position recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 at the recipient bed. In addition, the development of a nonhealing, critical-sized defect in the maxilla of the dog appears to require a more aggressive resection of bone to preclude spontaneous osseous regeneration.