+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Near IR spectroscopy to quantify the silica content and difference between silicified microcrystalline cellulose and physical mixtures of microcrystalline cellulose and silica



Near IR spectroscopy to quantify the silica content and difference between silicified microcrystalline cellulose and physical mixtures of microcrystalline cellulose and silica



European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 10(1): 77-80



Silicified microcrystalline cellulose (SMCC) has been shown to have advantages over conventional microcrystalline cellulose (MCC). These advantages are (i) improved tablet strength compared to that achieved with MCC, (ii) the retention of compressibility after wet granulation, whereas MCC produces weaker tablets after wet granulation, and (iii) superior flow properties than MCC. In this study near IR spectroscopy has been used to study MCC, SMCC (with different loadings of colloidal silicon dioxide, CSD) and physical mixtures of MCC and CSD. It was found that even though SMCC and MCC were very similar, there was a region of the near IR spectra (second derivative peak at 2194 nm) where a distinctive response was seen for SMCC. The size of the peak was proportional to the CSD content for the co-processed SMCC samples. The peak was not present to the same extent for physical mixtures. A combination of near IR and a test for total silica content would make it possible to discern whether microcrystalline cellulose samples were SMCC material or simple physical mixtures.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 011040957

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 10699385

DOI: 10.1016/s0928-0987(99)00089-5


Related references

Physico-chemical properties of silicified microcrystalline cellulose in comparison with microcrystalline cellulose/silica blends. Pharmaceutical Research (New York) 14(11 Suppl. ): S201, 1997

Water sorption and near IR spectroscopy to study the differences between microcrystalline cellulose and silicified microcrystalline cellulose before and after wet granulation. International Journal of Pharmaceutics (Amsterdam) 181(1): 41-47, 1999

An investigation of the effect of granulating fluid level on the physical-mechanical properties of microcrystalline cellulose and silicified microcrystalline cellulose. Pharmaceutical Research (New York) 14(11 Suppl. ): S14, 1997

Use of a capillary rheometer to evaluate the rheological properties of microcrystalline cellulose and silicified microcrystalline cellulose wet masses. International Journal of Pharmaceutics (Kidlington) 216(1-2): 147-157, 23 March, 2001

Rheological characterization of microcrystalline cellulose and silicified microcrystalline cellulose wet masses using a mixer torque rheometer. International Journal of Pharmaceutics (Amsterdam) 188(2): 181-192, 1999

Thermodynamic characterisation of water sorption in microcrystalline cellulose and silicified microcrystalline cellulose , before and after wet granulation. Pharmaceutical Research (New York) 14(11 Suppl. ): S199-S200, 1997

Functional performance of silicified microcrystalline cellulose versus microcrystalline cellulose: a case study. Drug Development and Industrial Pharmacy 35(9): 1066-1071, 2009

Adsorption of an amine drug onto microcrystalline cellulose and silicified microcrystalline cellulose samples. Drug Development and Industrial Pharmacy 29(4): 475-487, 2003

Characterization of microcrystalline cellulose and silicified microcrystalline cellulose wet masses using a powder rheometer. European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 13(2): 143-149, 2001

The mechanical properties of compacts of microcrystalline cellulose and silicified microcrystalline cellulose. International Journal of Pharmaceutics (Kidlington) 200(1): 67-72, 2000

Physicochemical comparison between microcrystalline cellulose and silicified microcrystalline cellulose. International Journal Of Pharmaceutics (amsterdam). 169(2): 183-194, Y 15, 1998

Weight and weight uniformity of hard gelatin capsules filled with microcrystalline cellulose and silicified microcrystalline cellulose. Drug Development and Industrial Pharmacy 28(4): 467-472, 2002

Crystallinity and physical characteristics of microcrystalline cellulose. II. Fine structure of ground microcrystalline cellulose. Chemical & Pharmaceutical Bulletin 25(10): 2490-2496, 1977

Growth promotion of microalgae Dunaliella bardawil and disruption of microcrystalline cellulose structure by the interactions between cellulose hydrogen bonds and algae exudates: Microcrystalline cellulose in the algae culture medium. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation 77: 72-77, 2013

Is silicified wet-granulated microcrystalline cellulose better than original wet-granulated microcrystalline cellulose?. Pharmaceutical Development and Technology 4(3): 431-437, 1999