MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-Two Sprague Dawley (SD) male rats were divided into four groups. The group 1 was administrated with distilled water intragastrically and injected sterile saline subcutaneously. The group 2 was administrated with EA orally and injected with sterile saline subcutaneously. The groups 3 & 4 were subcutaneously exposed to Ni for 4 weeks twice daily before tooth extraction procedure, and maintained Ni injection until the animals were sacrificed. After one month Ni exposure, the group 4 was fed with EA while continuing Ni injection. All the groups were anesthetized, and the upper left incisor was extracted. Four rats from each group were sacrificed on 14(th) and 28(th) days. Tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), Interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β) and Interleukin-6 (IL-6) were applied to assess in serum rat at 14th and 28(th) days. Superoxide dismutase (SOD) and Thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBRAS) levels were assessed to evaluate the antioxidant status and lipid peroxidation accordingly after tooth extraction in homogenized gingival maxilla tissue of rat at 14(th) and 28(th) days. The socket hard tissue was stained by eosin and hematoxylin (H&E); immunohistochemical technique was used to assess the healing process by Osteocalcin (OCN) and Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP) biomarkers.
RESULTS: Ni-induced rats administered with EA compound (Group 4) dropped the elevated concentration of pro-inflammatory cytokines significantly when compared to Ni-induced rats (Group 3) (p<0.05). Ni-induced rats administrated with EA compound (Group 4) showed significant production of SOD and recession in TBRAS level when compared to Ni-induced rats (Group 3) (p<0.05). The immunohistochemistry analysis has revealed that OCN and ALP have presented stronger expression in Ni-induced rats treated with EA (Group 4), as against Ni-induced rats (Group 3).
CONCLUSION: We have concluded that, Ni-induced rats, treated with EA have exerted positive effect on the trabecular bone formation after tooth extraction in nicotinic rats could be due to the antioxidant activity of EA which lead to upregulate of OCN and ALP proteins which are responsible for osteogenesis.
METHODS: Saccharide mapping or enzymatic profiling plays a role in quality control of polysaccharides. Whereby, in vitro and in vivo tests as well as toxicity level discriminating polysaccharides biological activities. Extraction and purification methods are performed in obtaining algal derived polysaccharides followed by chromatographic profiles of their active compounds, structural features, physicochemical properties, and reported biological activities.
RESULTS: Marine algae are capable of synthesizing Glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) and non-GAGs or GAG mimetics such as sulfated glycans. The cell walls of algae are rich in sulfated polysaccharides, including alginate, carrageenan, ulvan and fucoidan. These biopolymers are widely used algal-derived polysaccharides for biological and biomedical applications due to their biocompatibility and availability. They constitute biochemical compounds that have multi-functionalization, therapeutic potential and immunomodulatory abilities, making them promising bioactive products and biomaterials with a wide range of biomedical applications.
CONCLUSION: Algal-derived polysaccharides with clearly elucidated compositions/structures, identified cellular activities, as well as desirable physical properties have shown the potential that may create new opportunities. They could be maximally exploited to serve as therapeutic tools such as immunoregulatory agents or drug delivery vehicles. Hence, novel strategies could be applied to tailor multi-functionalization of the polysaccharides from algal species with vast biomedical application potentials.
METHODS: The PubMed database and Google scholar were browsed by keywords of 3-D printing, drug delivery, and personalised medicine. The data about techniques employed in the manufacturing of 3-D printed medicines and the application of 3-D printing technology in the fabrication of individualised medicine were collected, analysed and discussed.
RESULTS: Numerous techniques can fabricate 3-D printed medicines however, printing-based inkjet, nozzle-based deposition and laser-based writing systems are the most popular 3-D printing methods which have been employed successfully in the development of tablets, polypills, implants, solutions, nanoparticles, targeted and topical dug delivery. In addition, the approval of Spritam® containing levetiracetam by FDA as the primary 3-D printed drug product has boosted its importance. However, some drawbacks such as suitability of manufacturing techniques and the available excipients for 3-D printing need to be addressed to ensure simple, feasible, reliable and reproducible 3-D printed fabrication.
CONCLUSION: 3-D printing is a revolutionary in pharmaceutical technology to cater the present and future needs of individualised medicines. Nonetheless, more investigations are required on its manufacturing aspects in terms cost effectiveness, reproducibility and bio-equivalence.