Author Contributions
Conceptualization: S.Y., S.J., Y.H.K., G.H.K., and J.L.; methodology: S.Y., S.J., D.K., B.H.K., H.K.C., and J.L.; resources: S.Y., S.J., and J.L.; writing—original draft preparation: S.Y., S.J., H.K.C., and J.L.; funding acquisition: H.K.C., Y.H.K., G.H.K., and J.L.; supervision: J.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Figure 1.
Physicochemical characteristics (average particle size, polydispersity index (PDI), and zeta potential) of adenosine-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNs). Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). (A) Particle size and PDI and (B) zeta potential of adenosine-loaded SLNs prepared using different materials and compositions of adenosine, lipids, and surfactants. PDI, polydispersity index; SLNs, solid lipid nanoparticles.
Figure 1.
Physicochemical characteristics (average particle size, polydispersity index (PDI), and zeta potential) of adenosine-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNs). Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). (A) Particle size and PDI and (B) zeta potential of adenosine-loaded SLNs prepared using different materials and compositions of adenosine, lipids, and surfactants. PDI, polydispersity index; SLNs, solid lipid nanoparticles.
Figure 2.
Physicochemical characteristics (average particle size, polydispersity index (PDI), and zeta potential) of adenosine-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNs). Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). (A) Particle size and PDI and (B) zeta potential of adenosine-loaded SLNs prepared using different pressures. (C) Particle size and PDI and (D) zeta potential of adenosine-loaded SLNs prepared using different number of cycles. PDI, polydispersity index; SLNs, solid lipid nanoparticles.
Figure 2.
Physicochemical characteristics (average particle size, polydispersity index (PDI), and zeta potential) of adenosine-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNs). Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). (A) Particle size and PDI and (B) zeta potential of adenosine-loaded SLNs prepared using different pressures. (C) Particle size and PDI and (D) zeta potential of adenosine-loaded SLNs prepared using different number of cycles. PDI, polydispersity index; SLNs, solid lipid nanoparticles.
Figure 3.
Loading efficiency and loading amount of AD-loaded SLNs. Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). (A) Loading efficiency and (B) loading amount of AD-loaded SLNs prepared using different compositions of AD, lipids, surfactants. AD, adenosine; PDI, polydispersity index; SLNs, solid lipid nanoparticles.
Figure 3.
Loading efficiency and loading amount of AD-loaded SLNs. Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). (A) Loading efficiency and (B) loading amount of AD-loaded SLNs prepared using different compositions of AD, lipids, surfactants. AD, adenosine; PDI, polydispersity index; SLNs, solid lipid nanoparticles.
Figure 4.
Loading capacity of AD-loaded SLNs prepared using different parameters for homogenization. Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). (A) Loading efficiency (LE) and particle size and (B) LA and particle size of AD-loaded SLNs prepared using different pressures. (C) LE and particle size and (D) loading amount (LA) and particle size of AD-loaded SLNs prepared using different number of cycles. AD, adenosine; SLNs, solid lipid nanoparticles; LE, loading efficiency; LA, loading amount.
Figure 4.
Loading capacity of AD-loaded SLNs prepared using different parameters for homogenization. Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). (A) Loading efficiency (LE) and particle size and (B) LA and particle size of AD-loaded SLNs prepared using different pressures. (C) LE and particle size and (D) loading amount (LA) and particle size of AD-loaded SLNs prepared using different number of cycles. AD, adenosine; SLNs, solid lipid nanoparticles; LE, loading efficiency; LA, loading amount.
Figure 5.
Viscosity of the elastic artificial skin. Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). AB0: Non-SLN artificial skin; AB1: Artificial skin with 1% SLNs; AB5: Artificial skin with 5% SLNs; AB10: The artificial skin with 10% SLNs; AB15: Artificial skin with 15% SLNs. Statistical significance of the difference in viscosity between the formulation without SLNs, and formulations with SLNs is indicated by either a single asterisk (p < 0.05) or double asterisks (p < 0.01). SLNs, solid lipid nanoparticles.
Figure 5.
Viscosity of the elastic artificial skin. Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). AB0: Non-SLN artificial skin; AB1: Artificial skin with 1% SLNs; AB5: Artificial skin with 5% SLNs; AB10: The artificial skin with 10% SLNs; AB15: Artificial skin with 15% SLNs. Statistical significance of the difference in viscosity between the formulation without SLNs, and formulations with SLNs is indicated by either a single asterisk (p < 0.05) or double asterisks (p < 0.01). SLNs, solid lipid nanoparticles.
Figure 6.
Thickness of the elastic artificial skin. Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). AB0: Non-SLN artificial skin; AB1: Artificial skin with 1% SLNs; AB5: Artificial skin with 5% SLNs; AB10: Artificial skin with 10% SLNs; AB15: Artificial skin with 15% SLNs. Statistical significance of the difference in thickness between the elastic artificial skin without SLNs and the formulations with SLNs was indicated by a single asterisk (p < 0.05).
Figure 6.
Thickness of the elastic artificial skin. Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). AB0: Non-SLN artificial skin; AB1: Artificial skin with 1% SLNs; AB5: Artificial skin with 5% SLNs; AB10: Artificial skin with 10% SLNs; AB15: Artificial skin with 15% SLNs. Statistical significance of the difference in thickness between the elastic artificial skin without SLNs and the formulations with SLNs was indicated by a single asterisk (p < 0.05).
Figure 7.
Cumulative percentage release profiles of adenosine from (A) solid lipid nanoparticles and (B) the synthesized elastic artificial skin with/without SLNs in release medium, as determined using dialysis bag method. Results are expressed as the means ± standard errors of three independent experiments (n = 3). B0: non-SLN B formulation; B1: B formulation with 1% SLNs; B5: B formulation with 5% SLNs; B10: B formulation with 10% SLNs; B15: B formulation with 15% SLNs; AB0: Non-SLN artificial skin; AB1: Artificial skin with 1% SLNs; AB5: Artificial skin with 5% SLNs; AB10: Artificial skin with 10% SLNs; AB15: The artificial skin with 15% SLNs.
Figure 7.
Cumulative percentage release profiles of adenosine from (A) solid lipid nanoparticles and (B) the synthesized elastic artificial skin with/without SLNs in release medium, as determined using dialysis bag method. Results are expressed as the means ± standard errors of three independent experiments (n = 3). B0: non-SLN B formulation; B1: B formulation with 1% SLNs; B5: B formulation with 5% SLNs; B10: B formulation with 10% SLNs; B15: B formulation with 15% SLNs; AB0: Non-SLN artificial skin; AB1: Artificial skin with 1% SLNs; AB5: Artificial skin with 5% SLNs; AB10: Artificial skin with 10% SLNs; AB15: The artificial skin with 15% SLNs.
Figure 8.
Irritation study and morphological evaluation using Detroit 551 cell line. (A) Viability of Detroit 551 cells treated with SLN components and AD solution, (B) the native morphology of Detroit 551 cells, and (C) nanoparticle-treated morphology of Detroit 551 cells. Cell viability was measured using MTT assay. The values greater than 50% (dotted line) indicate that test materials are non-irritant to the skin. Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation of three independent experiments (n = 3). NC: DPBS; PC: 5% SDS solution; SA: Stearic acid; DW: Distilled water; SP 80: Span 80; PX 188: Poloxamer 188, AD: Adenosine.
Figure 8.
Irritation study and morphological evaluation using Detroit 551 cell line. (A) Viability of Detroit 551 cells treated with SLN components and AD solution, (B) the native morphology of Detroit 551 cells, and (C) nanoparticle-treated morphology of Detroit 551 cells. Cell viability was measured using MTT assay. The values greater than 50% (dotted line) indicate that test materials are non-irritant to the skin. Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation of three independent experiments (n = 3). NC: DPBS; PC: 5% SDS solution; SA: Stearic acid; DW: Distilled water; SP 80: Span 80; PX 188: Poloxamer 188, AD: Adenosine.
Figure 9.
Irritation study and morphological evaluation using CCD 986sk cell line. (A) Viability of CCD 986sk cells treated with SLN components and AD solution, (B) the native morphology of CCD 986sk cells, and (C) nanoparticle-treated morphology of CCD 986sk cells. Cell viability was measured using MTT assay. The values greater than 50% (dotted line) indicate that test materials are non-irritant to the skin. Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). NC: DPBS; PC: 5% SDS solution; SA: Stearic acid; DW: Distilled water; SP 80: Span 80; PX 188: Poloxamer 188; AD: Adenosine.
Figure 9.
Irritation study and morphological evaluation using CCD 986sk cell line. (A) Viability of CCD 986sk cells treated with SLN components and AD solution, (B) the native morphology of CCD 986sk cells, and (C) nanoparticle-treated morphology of CCD 986sk cells. Cell viability was measured using MTT assay. The values greater than 50% (dotted line) indicate that test materials are non-irritant to the skin. Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). NC: DPBS; PC: 5% SDS solution; SA: Stearic acid; DW: Distilled water; SP 80: Span 80; PX 188: Poloxamer 188; AD: Adenosine.
Figure 10.
Viability of SkinEthic RHE tissue treated with SLN components and AD solution. The cell viability was measured using MTT assay. The values greater than 50% (dotted line) indicate that test materials are non-irritant to the skin. Results are expressed as means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). NC: DPBS; PC: 5% SDS solution; SA: Stearic acid; DW: Distilled water; SP 80: Span 80; PX 188: Poloxamer 188; AD: Adenosine.
Figure 10.
Viability of SkinEthic RHE tissue treated with SLN components and AD solution. The cell viability was measured using MTT assay. The values greater than 50% (dotted line) indicate that test materials are non-irritant to the skin. Results are expressed as means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). NC: DPBS; PC: 5% SDS solution; SA: Stearic acid; DW: Distilled water; SP 80: Span 80; PX 188: Poloxamer 188; AD: Adenosine.
Figure 11.
Viability of SkinEthic RHE tissue treated with components of the elastic artificial skin. The cell viability was measured using MTT assay. The values greater than 50% (dotted line) indicate that test materials are non-irritant to the skin. Results are expressed as means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3).
Figure 11.
Viability of SkinEthic RHE tissue treated with components of the elastic artificial skin. The cell viability was measured using MTT assay. The values greater than 50% (dotted line) indicate that test materials are non-irritant to the skin. Results are expressed as means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3).
Figure 12.
Cumulative permeation profiles for adenosine from solid lipid nanoparticles into the medium. Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3).
Figure 12.
Cumulative permeation profiles for adenosine from solid lipid nanoparticles into the medium. Results are expressed as the means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3).
Figure 13.
Cumulative permeation profiles of AD from the synthesized elastic artificial skin with/without SLNs in the medium. Results are expressed as the means ± standard errors of three independent experiments (n = 3). B0: non-SLN B formulation; B1: B formulation with 1% SLNs; B5: B formulation with 5% SLNs; B10: B formulation with 10% SLNs; B15: B formulation with 15% SLNs; AB0: Non-SLN artificial skin; AB1: The artificial skin with 1% SLNs; AB5: The artificial skin with 5% SLNs; AB10: The artificial skin with 10% SLNs; AB15: The artificial skin with 15% SLNs.
Figure 13.
Cumulative permeation profiles of AD from the synthesized elastic artificial skin with/without SLNs in the medium. Results are expressed as the means ± standard errors of three independent experiments (n = 3). B0: non-SLN B formulation; B1: B formulation with 1% SLNs; B5: B formulation with 5% SLNs; B10: B formulation with 10% SLNs; B15: B formulation with 15% SLNs; AB0: Non-SLN artificial skin; AB1: The artificial skin with 1% SLNs; AB5: The artificial skin with 5% SLNs; AB10: The artificial skin with 10% SLNs; AB15: The artificial skin with 15% SLNs.
Figure 14.
Results for AD retention from AD-loaded SLNs in SkinEthic RHE tissue after permeation studies. Results are expressed as means ± standard deviation of three independent experiments (n = 3).
Figure 14.
Results for AD retention from AD-loaded SLNs in SkinEthic RHE tissue after permeation studies. Results are expressed as means ± standard deviation of three independent experiments (n = 3).
Figure 15.
Retention studies for the synthesized elastic artificial skin with/without SLNs in SkinEthic RHE model after permeation studies. Results are expressed as means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). B0: Non-SLN B formulation; B1: B formulation with 1% SLNs; B5: B formulation with 5% SLNs; B10: B formulation with 10% SLNs; B15: B formulation with 15% SLNs; AB0: Non-SLN artificial skin; AB1: Artificial skin with 1% SLNs; AB5: Artificial skin with 5% SLNs; AB10: Artificial skin with 10% SLNs; AB 15: Artificial skin with 15% SLNs.
Figure 15.
Retention studies for the synthesized elastic artificial skin with/without SLNs in SkinEthic RHE model after permeation studies. Results are expressed as means ± standard deviations of three independent experiments (n = 3). B0: Non-SLN B formulation; B1: B formulation with 1% SLNs; B5: B formulation with 5% SLNs; B10: B formulation with 10% SLNs; B15: B formulation with 15% SLNs; AB0: Non-SLN artificial skin; AB1: Artificial skin with 1% SLNs; AB5: Artificial skin with 5% SLNs; AB10: Artificial skin with 10% SLNs; AB 15: Artificial skin with 15% SLNs.
Table 1.
Composition of adenosine (AD)-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles.
Table 1.
Composition of adenosine (AD)-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles.
Formulation | Drug (mg) | Lipid (g) | Lipophilic Surfactant (g) | Hydrophilic Surfactant (g) |
---|
AD | LUA | MA | PA | SA | GMS | SP | PX | TW |
---|
80 | 40 | 20 | 188 | 407 | 80 |
---|
F1 | 75 | 0.5 | | | | | 0.02 | | | 1 | | |
F2 | 75 | | 0.5 | | | | 0.02 | | | 1 | | |
F3 | 75 | | | 0.5 | | | 0.02 | | | 1 | | |
F4 | 75 | | | | 0.5 | | 0.02 | | | 1 | | |
F5 | 75 | | | | | 0.5 | 0.02 | | | 1 | | |
F6 | 75 | | | | 0.5 | | | 0.02 | | 1 | | |
F7 | 75 | | | | 0.5 | | | | 0.02 | 1 | | |
F8 | 75 | | | | 0.5 | | 0.02 | | | | 1 | |
F9 | 75 | | | | 0.5 | | 0.02 | | | | | 1 |
F10 | 25 | | | | 0.5 | | 0.02 | | | 1 | | |
F11 | 50 | | | | 0.5 | | 0.02 | | | 1 | | |
F12 | 75 | | | | 0.5 | | 0.1 | | | 1 | | |
F13 | 75 | | | | 0.5 | | 0.5 | | | 1 | | |
F14 | 75 | | | | 1.5 | | 0.06 | | | 1 | | |
F15 | 75 | | | | 1.5 | | 0.3 | | | 1 | | |
F16 | 75 | | | | 1.5 | | 1.5 | | | 1 | | |
F17 | 75 | | | | 2.5 | | 0.1 | | | 1 | | |
F18 | 75 | | | | 2.5 | | 0.5 | | | 1 | | |
F19 | 75 | | | | 2.5 | | 2.5 | | | 1 | | |
Table 2.
Variations in homogenization pressure and number of cycles assessed while fabricating solid lipid nanoparticles.
Table 2.
Variations in homogenization pressure and number of cycles assessed while fabricating solid lipid nanoparticles.
Pressure. | Number of Cycles |
---|
Number of Cycles | Pressure (psi) | Pressure (psi) | Cycles |
---|
3 | 10,000 | 20,000 | 1 |
15,000 | 2 |
20,000 | 3 |
25,000 | 4 |
30,000 | 5 |
Table 3.
Composition of component A in the elastic artificial skin.
Table 3.
Composition of component A in the elastic artificial skin.
Ingredients | % Composition |
---|
HRC-LS-2830/1A | 80 |
Serasense SF1 | 10 |
DC® RM 2051 | 5 |
Cellulose nanofiber-graft-vinyltrimethoxysilane | 5 |
Total | 100 |
Table 4.
Composition of component B in the elastic artificial skin.
Table 4.
Composition of component B in the elastic artificial skin.
Ingredients | % Composition |
---|
DI water | 69.84 |
Edetate disodium | 0.02 |
1,2-Hexanediol | 2 |
1,3-Propanediol | 5 |
Glycerin | 5 |
M-Hydro EG | 5 |
Sepimax Zen | 0.5 |
Aristoflex AVC | 0.1 |
HRC-LS-2830/1B | 5 |
Olivem 1000 | 3 |
Olivem 900 | 1.5 |
Niacinamide | 2 |
Adenosine | 0.04 |
Sepiplus 400 | 1 |
Total | 100 |
Table 5.
Composition of the elastic artificial skin incorporated with adenosine-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles.
Table 5.
Composition of the elastic artificial skin incorporated with adenosine-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles.
Formulation | Adenosine-Loaded Solid Lipid Nanoparticles (%) | B component of the Elastic Artificial Skin (%) |
---|
B0 | 0 | 100 |
B1 | 1 | 99 |
B5 | 5 | 95 |
B10 | 10 | 90 |
B15 | 15 | 85 |
Table 6.
Tensile strength, elongation at break, and Young’s modulus of the elastic artificial skins with/without adenosine-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles.
Table 6.
Tensile strength, elongation at break, and Young’s modulus of the elastic artificial skins with/without adenosine-loaded solid lipid nanoparticles.
Formulation | Tensile Strength (MPa) | Elongation at Break (%) | Young’s Modulus (MPa) |
---|
AB0 | 1.78 ± 0.15 | 12.00 ± 5.89 | 14.81 ± 1.28 |
AB1 | 1.90 ± 0.08 | 21.33 ± 3.40 | 8.93 ± 0.38 |
AB5 | 1.43 ± 0.09 | 35.33 ± 1.89 | 4.05 ± 0.24 |
AB10 | 1.11 ± 0.13 | 50.67 ± 2.49 | 2.19 ± 0.25 |
AB15 | 0.76 ± 0.14 | 58.67 ± 2.49 | 1.29 ± 0.24 |