{"id":52739,"date":"2023-12-31T10:46:53","date_gmt":"2023-12-31T10:46:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/?p=52739"},"modified":"2024-01-05T06:49:10","modified_gmt":"2024-01-05T06:49:10","slug":"simultaneous-estimation-of-curcumin-and-gentamicin-by-uv-vis-spectrometric-methods-or-derivative-spectroscopic-techniques","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/vol16no4\/simultaneous-estimation-of-curcumin-and-gentamicin-by-uv-vis-spectrometric-methods-or-derivative-spectroscopic-techniques\/","title":{"rendered":"Simultaneous Estimation of Curcumin and Gentamicin by UV-VIS Spectrometric Methods or Derivative Spectroscopic Techniques"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Introduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Unlike\nother types of wound injuries, burn wound injuries results into remarkable\nmortality rate due to which millions of people get affected and seek medical\nattention. A number of antibiotics are utilized with an aim to drop down the\nthreat of microbial infection in burn wound patient prior to be 0 encounters. 1<\/sup>\nFew of them routed through dermal layers and others through oral or injectable\nroute. There are a number of antibiotic therapies available for treatment of\nburn wound infections but these treatments face a number of challenges like\nantibiotic resistance, delayed release, delivery of optimum concentration of\ndrug at site of action.2<\/sup> Gentamicin (GEN) and Curcumin (CUR) is the\npotent antibiotic against bacterial infections produced by Gram positive and\ngram-negative bacteria respectively. As per the literature,  In burn injury, a combination of Curcumin and\nGentamicin revealed synergism against P. aeruginosa. So here we have selected\ncombination of these two drugs to make an effective formulation.3<\/sup> the\nCurcumin is the natural compound (Phenolic), extracted from turmeric, one of\nthe popular Indian spices from plant of Curcuma\nLonga Linn<\/em>. This compound has antioxidant, anti-inflammatory as well as\nantimicrobial actions.4<\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s\nalready been suggested by a number of studies that Curcumin have poor\nabsorption through gut and it also conquers Cytochrome P450 isoenzyme and\nmetabolized by glucuronidation. 5<\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Gentamicin sulfate is basically isolated from the\nMicro mono spore\u2019s purpurea that is an actinimycete. The Derived antibiotics is\na water soluble antibiotic belongs to a group of aminoglycosides6, 7.<\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Various Curcumin and Gentamicin\nsulphate formulations include nanoparticles, liposomes phytosomes,\nimproves bioavailability solubility, dissolution rate.The\nbinary mixture must be more effective in controlling diseases. Analytical\ntechniques tend to provide information of the constituents of particular\nformulation mentioned in the label.8<\/sup> For separation and estimation\nof multi-components of a formulation, various techniques, like chromatographic\nand Spectrophotometric, have been reported 9,10 <\/sup> .Chromatographic\ntechniques like HPLC being quite more complicated , time-consuming, and require\nhigh consumption of organic solvents 11<\/sup> while in  HPTLC, plate length is limited so separation\ncan take place up to certain length. Earlier methods reported for simultaneous\nestimation of Curcumin and Gentamicin sulphate in nanoformulations. UV Visible\nSpectrophotometer has advantages than other analytical techniques as it is one\nof simple, rapid, method for quantitative determination. UV Spectrophotometric\nmethod are reported in numerous mixture of drugs such as Cefixime and Ofloxacin12<\/sup>,Cefixime\nand Lisinopril13<\/sup>,Rosuvastatin Calcium and Glimepride14<\/sup>,Nimesulide\nand Diclofenac Sodium15<\/sup>,Metformine Hydrochloride and Pioglitazine16<\/sup>,Tizanidine\nand Aceclofenac17<\/sup> , Levosulpride and Esomeprazole 18<\/sup>,Diazepam\nand Propranolol 19<\/sup>in bulk and Tablet dosage form and alone,Triamcealone20<\/sup>,Ziprasidone21\n<\/sup>in tablet dosage form. Present work emphasizes onvalidating of UV Visible\nSpectrophotometric analytical method for Curcumin and Gentamicin sulphate, in\ncombination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Materials and Methods <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Chemicals and Reagents<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Curcumin was procured from Lobachemie, Mumbai while Gentamicin sulphate from Himedia Ltd., Mumbai, India and analytical grade of Methanol was used from M\/s Merck Ltd., Mumbai, India.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Instrumentation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The projected effort was carried on Shimadzu UV-1800; UV spectrophotometer which have double beam double detector pattern with a1 cm quartz coordinated cell. Calibrated analytical balance was opted for weighing of contents.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Selection of Solvents<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the basis of solubility study methanol was selected as the solvent for dissolving Curcumin and Gentamicin sulphate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Preparation of binary mixture<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The binary mixtures Curcumin and Gentamicin sulphate in a 1:1 proportion by weight were prepared and mechanically homogenized with a mortar and pestle<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Preparation of standard stock solution of Gentamicin\nsulphate and Curcumin:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Curcumin Stock Solution<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Curcumin (10 mg) was properly weighed and dissolved in methanol (20 ml) using ultrasonication for approximately 10 minutes in a 100 ml volumetric flask. Curcumin standard stock solution (100\/ml) was then prepared up to the required volume using methanol.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Curcumin Working Standard Solution<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Curcumin Standard Solution for Work Standard stock solution of Curcumin To make a working standard solution, 5 ml of methanol was diluted to 50 ml a concentration of ten grammes per milliliter<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Gentamicin sulphate Stock Solution<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stock Solution of Gentamicin sulphate In a 100 ml volumetric flask, a properly weighed quantity of Gentamicin sulphate (10 mg) was dissolved in water (20 ml) using ultrasonication for around 10 minutes. The Gentamicin sulphate standard stock solution (100\/ml) was then brought up to the required volume using water.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Gentamicin sulphate working Standard Solution<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Working Standard Solution of Gentamicin sulphate Standard stock solution of Gentamicin sulphate to make a working standard solution, 5 ml of phosphate buffer pH 6.8 was diluted to 50 ml. 100 g per ml.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Determination of \u03bb Max of Individual Component<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

For Curcumin and Gentamicin sulphate 2 g\/ml dilution, an adequate aliquot fraction of Gentamicin sulphate and Curcumin (2 ml) was transferred to two separate 10 ml volumetric flasks, and the volume was brought up to the mark using methanol and water. Between 200 nm and 800 nm, drug solutions were scanned sequentially. Gentamicin sulphate has a maximum at 244 nm, while Curcumin has a peak at 420 nm. Before analysis, the solutions were filtered employing Wattmann filter paper<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/td>\n\n

Graph 1: UV Spectra of Gentamicin Sulphate<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

Click here to view Graph<\/a><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/td>\n\n

Graph 2: UV Spectra of Curcumin<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

Click here to view Graph<\/a><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n

Linearity Study for Curcumin<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Six separate 10 ml volumetric flasks were loaded\nwith an accurately specified quantity of Curcumin working standard solution. To\nget concentrations (2-12g\/ml), the volume was brought up to the mark with\nmethanol. These solutions’ absorbance was measured at 420 nm the absorbance Vs\nconcentration calibration curve was constructed as illustrated in (fig. 1).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Linearity\nStudy for Gentamicin sulphate<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Six\nseparate 10 ml volumetric flasks were filled with accurately measured aliquot\namounts of Gentamicin sulphate working standard solution. To acquire\nconcentrations (2-12g\/ml), the volume was brought up to the mark using\ndistilled water. These solutions’ absorbance was measured at 244nm. The\nabsorbance Vs concentration calibration curve was plotted as depicted in (Fig. 2).<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\"\"

Figure 1<\/p><\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Figure 1: Calibration curve of Curcumin<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

Click here to view Figure<\/a><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/td>\n\n

Figure 2: Calibration curve of and Gentamicin sulphate<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

Click here to view Figure<\/a><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n

Overlay Spectra of Gentamicin Sulphate and Curcumin<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The overlain spectrum of both drugs (2  \u00b5g\/ml) was recorded (Fig.5) and two wavelengths 420.0 nm (\u03bb max of Curcumin) and 244 nm (\u03bb max of Gentamicin sulphate) were selected for further study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/td>\n\n

Graph 3: overlay spectra of Gentamicin Sulphate and Curcumin<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Click here to view Graph<\/a><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n

Linear regression analysis<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Linear regression analysis of the data attained 2-12 \u00b5g\/ml which depicts highly linear relationship as the correlation coefficient (R2<\/sup>) value were around 0.995for Curcumin and 0.993 for Gentamicin sulphate. Calibration Curve equation, Y= 0.0015x \u00b1001 for Gentamicin sulphate and Y=0 .139x\u00b1002 for Curcumin at \u03bbmax<\/sub>244nm for Gentamicin sulphate and 420 for Curcumin<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Simultaneous Equation method<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Curcumin\nand Gentamicin sulphate mixtures were weighed appropriately at 25mg each. The\nGentamicin sulphate is first dissolved in water (5 ml), then transferred to a\nvolumetric flask with a capacity of 50 ml, where the Curcumin is dissolved in a\nsmall amount of methanol (20 ml) using ultrasonication for about 10 minutes.\nThe two solutions were then combined in a 50 ml volumetric flask, and the\nvolume was increased to the desired level with methanol to create a mixed standard\nstock solution (100 mg\/ml). To obtain a working standard solution of 100 g \/\nml, 5 ml of standard stock solution was diluted to 50 ml in methanol. In 10 ml\nvolumetric flasks, an adequate amount of Gentamicin sulfate and Curcumin (2 ml)\nwere transferred, and the volume was made up to the mark using<\/strong> the\nsimultaneous equation approach (Vierodt’s method), the concentrations of each\ncomponent were calculated.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A1<\/strong>\n= ax1<\/sub>bcx<\/sub> + ay1 <\/sub>bcy——— <\/sub>(at\n\u03bb1\u2013244nm) <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A2<\/strong> =ax2<\/sub>bcy<\/sub>\n+ ay2<\/sub>bcy<\/sub> ———- (at \u03bb2\u2013420 nm)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Amount of each drug was estimated using following equations,<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

A1=\nabsorbance value(244nm)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A2=\nabsorbance value (420nm)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ax1<\/sub>=\nAbsorptivity of Gentamicin sulphate\nat 244nm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ay1<\/sub>=\nAbsorptivity of Curcumin at 420nm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ax2<\/sub>=\nAbsorptivity of Gentamicin sulphate\nat 420nmn <\/p>\n\n\n\n

ay2<\/sub>=\nAbsorptivity of Curcumin at 244nm<\/p>\n\n\n\n

C1=\nconcentration of Gentamicin sulphate\nin \u03bcg\/ml  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

C2=\nconcentration of Curcumin in \u03bcg\/ml<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Absorptivity values for simultaneous\nequation are enclosed in Table 2<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Table 1: Absorptivity Values for Simultaneous Estimation of Gentamicin sulphate and Curcumin<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

S. No<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Drug<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Parameters<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Absorptivity<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

1<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Gentamicin sulphate<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

ax1<\/sub><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

ax2<\/sub><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.012<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Curcumin<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

ay1<\/sub><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

ay2<\/sub><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.2485<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.061<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Mixture<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

A1<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

A2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.497<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.146<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Each value is an average of three determinants.<\/p>\n

C1 and C2 were found to be  2 \u03bcg\/ml in mixture<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n

Validation of Proposed Method<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Proposed method was validated as per the ICH guidelines<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Accuracy<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The closeness of agreement between the value regarded as a conventional true value and the value found is expressed by the accuracy of an analytical technique. It’s a match between the value discovered and a previously agreed-upon reference value. 21<\/sup> The method’s accuracy was tested by making a 1 g\/ml stock solution, then diluting it to 100 g\/ml, then preparing 80 percent, 100 percent, and 120 percent dilutions and analyzing them at these varied levels. With a percent relative standard deviation (percent RSD) of less than 2.00 percent, it has outstanding reproducibility. Within the range stated in table no. 2, the accuracy was established.22<\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Table 2: Accuracy Study<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Accuracy Parameters<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Curcumin <\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Gentamicin sulphate<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Initial amount(\u00b5g\/ml)<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2\u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2\u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2  \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n

\n<\/p><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Added amount (\u00b5g\/ml)<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2.4 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3.6 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

1.6 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

2.4 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

%Recovery<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

98.1%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

96%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

98.4%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

96.1%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

98.3%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

95.4%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

%RSD<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.15%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.14%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.19%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.23%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.19%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.21%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n

Precision<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is defined as the method’s degree of repeatability under normal operating conditions. Three distinct concentrations of diluted solution (25 percent, 50 percent, and 75 percent) were evaluated at different time-points on the same day, and the study was repeated the next day. To validate the precision of the devised approach, SD and percent RSD values were computed. 24<\/sup> Intermediate (inter-day) and repeatability (intra-day) investigations calculated it for three concentration levels (2, 4,6g\/ml), encompassing the complete linearity range, and it was expressed as percent RSD. The results show that the procedure is extremely accurate. In Table No. 3, the precision values are tabulated.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Table 3: Curcumin and Gentamicin Sulphate Precision   Study<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n

Curcumin  Precision Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Conc. taken<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Conc. Observed\u00b1 SD<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

RSD<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

3 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3.18\u00b10.017<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.53%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

6 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

6.13\u00b10.029<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.47 %<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

9 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

9.04\u00b10.012<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.132 %<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Intermediate Precision  Evening (Day1)<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Conc. taken<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Conc. Observed\u00b1 SD<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

RSD<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

3 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3.06\u00b10.026<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.84%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

6 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

6.08\u00b1 0. 015<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.24%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

9 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

9.19\u00b10.019<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.20%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Intermediate Precision Morning  Inter day (Day 11)<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Conc. taken<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Conc. Observed\u00b1 SD<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

RSD<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

3 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3.13\u00b1 0.027<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.86%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

6 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

6.26\u00b10.012<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.19%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

9 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

9.28\u00b10.016<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.17%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Gentamicin Sulfate Precision Study<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Conc. taken<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Conc. Observed\u00b1 SD<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

RSD<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

3 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3.07\u00b1 0.014<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.45%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

6 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

6.29\u00b1 0.019<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.30 %<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

9 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

9.17\u00b1 0.011<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.11%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Intermediate Precision  Evening (Day1)<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Conc. taken<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Conc. Observed\u00b1 SD<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

RSD<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

3 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3.24\u00b1 0.015<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.46%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

6 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

6.19\u00b1 0.012<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.19<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

9 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

9.37\u00b10.017<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.18<\/p>\n

\n<\/p><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Intermediate Precision Morning  Inter day (Day 11)<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

Conc. taken<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

Conc. Observed\u00b1 SD<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

RSD<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

3 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

3.30\u00b1 0.028<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.84%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

6 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

6.24\u00b10.019<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.30<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n

9 \u00b5g\/ml<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

9.24\u00b10.014<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

\n

0.15%<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n\n\n

Robustness<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\nis used as a parameter characterizing the stability of the method\nwith respect to variations of the internal factors of the method.25<\/sup>It was examined by analyzing a drug concentration of 100\u00b5g\/ml with\nminute changes in \u03bbmax <\/sub>of\nboth the drugs. It has ability to remain unaffected by changes in \u03bbmax\n<\/sub>in analytical parameters. Conc. taken is 3\u00b5g\/ml which was observed 3.01\nin Gentamicin Sulphate and 3.09 in Curcumin by changing \u03bbmax.<\/sub><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ruggedness<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Spectrophotometric analysis of different\nconcentrations equivalent to 25 %, 50 % and 75 % diluted solution was performed\nby two analysts assesses the ruggedness of the developed method. All\nanalytical parameters are remaining unaffected even by performed by another\nanalyst. As Conc. taken is 3\u00b5g\/ml by both analyst and observed is 3.04 and 3.08<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sensitivity<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

LOD:\nThe lowest concentration of analyte that can be recognized but not measured in\na test sample. The lowest concentration of the standard curve that can be\ncomputed with reasonable accuracy and precision is referred to as the LOQ. For\nLOQ22, the noise to signal ratio should be 1:10. Equation 1 has been used to\ncalculate the values of LOD and LOQ.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

LOD=3.3\u03c3\/S; LOQ=10\u03c3\/S      \u03c3 is standard deviation S is slope<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nLOD and LOQ for Gentamicin sulphate in phosphate buffer were found to be 0.024\u00b5g\/ml and 0.045\u00b5g\/ml,\nrespectively and values for Curcumin were 0.024\u00b5g\/ml and 0.037 \u00b5g\/ml,\nrespectively which indicates adequate sensitivity of method <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In first-order derivative spectroscopy, Curcumin and Gentamicin Sulphate have zero crossing points of 420 nm and 244 nm, respectively. The spectrophotometric technique used methanol and distilled water as the solvent. The linearity of Curcumin and Gentamicin sulphate was established throughout a concentration range of 2\u201312 g\/ml, with correlation values of 0.995 and 0.996, respectively. Curcumin and Gentamicin Sulphate were reported to have mean percent recoveries of 98.88 percent and 98.54 percent, respectively. In both inter day and intraday testing, the method was proven to be repeatable. The method has been demonstrated to be accurate and dependable. The approach was successfully applied to pharmaceutical formulation with no influence from excipients, according to the recovery investigation. Recovery trials were used to examine the outcomes of the analysis, which were statistically evaluated. Gentamicin Sulphate LOD and LOQ in phosphate buffer were determined to be 0.024g\/ml and 0.045g\/ml, respectively, and Curcumin LOD and LOQ were 0.024g\/ml and 0.037 g\/ml, respectively, indicating appropriate sensitivity of the method.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Conflict of Interest <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are no conflict of interest<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Funding Sources<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is no funding sources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. Hussain Z., Thu H.E., Rawas-Qalaji M., Naseem M., Khan S. and Sohail M., Recent developments and advanced strategies for promoting burn wound healing. J Drug Deliv Sci Technol. 2020  :103092.
    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>
  2. Singh R., Roopmani P., Chauhan M., Basu S.M., Deeksha W., Kazem M.D., Hazra S., Rajakumara E. and Giri J., Silver sulfadiazine loaded core-shell airbrushed nanofibers for burn wound healing application. Int. J. Pharm, 2021; 613<\/em>:121358.
     CrossRef <\/a><\/li>
  3. Tran Q.H. and Doan T.T.,  A novel study on curcumin metal complexes: Solubility improvement, bioactivity, and trial burn wound treatment in rats. New J. Chem 2020; 44(30):13036-13045.
     CrossRef <\/a><\/li>
  4. Commandeur J. N. M, Vermeulen  N.P.E. Cytotoxicity and  cytoprotective activities of natural compounds. The case of curcumin.Molecular and Computational toxicology ,Medicinal Chemistry,1996; 26(7) : 667-680. doi.org\/10.3109\/00498259609046741.
    CrossRef <\/a><\/li>
  5. Patel R, Singh S.K , Singh S,  Development and Characterization of Curcumin Loaded  Transfersome for Transdermal Delivery. J. Pharm. Sci..2009; 1 (4): 71-80.<\/li>
  6. Holder G. M,. Plummer J. L, Ryan A.J.The metabolism and excretion of curcumin (1,7-bis-(4-hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)-1,6-heptadiene-3,5-dione) in the rat Xenobiotics .1978;8 (12): 761-8.doi.org\/10.3109\/00498257809069589.
     CrossRef <\/a><\/li>
  7.  Kelly G.S, Quercetin Monograph .Alternative Medicine Review.2011; 16(2):172-94.<\/li>
  8.  Rao J. Kadam S, Mahadik .k. Methods of estimation of multi-component formulations: a review, Indian Drugs.2002; 39(7):378-381.<\/li>
  9. Delhiraj .N, Anbazhagan .S, Validated chromatographical methods for the simultaneous estimation of antihypertensive drugs in multicomponent formulations. Der Pharma Chemica.2012; 4(6): 2416-2421.<\/li>
  10. Chandratrey. A, Sharma. R ,  Simultaneous spectrophotometric estimation and validation of three component tablet formulation containing paracetamol, nimesulide and tizanidine. Indian Journal of Chemical Technology.2010;17(3):229-232<\/li>
  11. Younis. S.E., El-Nahass. S.A., Soliman S.A, Simultaneous Micro-determination of Eplerenone and Torsemide in their Combined Tablets using HPTLC-Dual Wavelength Spectrodensitometric and Spectrophotometric Methods,  Microchem. J. 2020;156: 104861doi.org\/10.1016\/j.microc.2020.104861
    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>
  12. Santhi. N, Rajendran. S.S, Kumar Nallasivan .P  .Simultaneous Estimation of Cefixime and Ofloxacin in Bulk and Tablet Dosage Form. Asian J. Pharm. Anal…2011;1(3):50-52<\/li>
  13. AboulKher .A, SalehHanaa   .Spectrophotometric estimation of Lisinopril and Cefiximein bulk and dosage forms., Asian J. Pharm. Anal….2012;2(3) : 90-97<\/li>
  14.  Asma Afroz1<\/sup>, Tasnuva Haque2<\/sup>et al  Spectrophotometric  Estimation  of  Rosuvastatin  Calcium  and  Glimepiride in Tablet Dosage Form. Asian J. Pharm. Anal….2011;1(4):74-78.<\/li>
  15.  Rawat. S, Gupta. A, Spectrophotometric  Estimation  of  Nimesulide  and  Diclofenac Sodium  in Pharmaceutical Dosage Form. Asian J. Pharm. Anal… 2011; 1(4):85-87.<\/li>
  16. Rathod sonali.D, Patil.P.M ,  Jadhav  .S. B. UV Spectrophotometric Simultaneous determination of  Metformine Hydrochloride and Pioglitazine in combined dosage forms. Asian J. Pharm. Anal…..2012;2(1):5-9.<\/li>
  17. Umle R. S.*, Mundhey A.S.,Wate S.P. UV- Spectrophotometric Method Development and Validation for Estimation of Tizanidine and Aceclofenac in Tablet Formulation. Asian J. Pharm. Anal…2012; 2(4): 101-103.<\/li>
  18. Jain .M, Yogesh. A. UV Spectrophotometric Methods for Simultaneous Estimation of Levosulpiride and Esomeprazole in Capsule Dosage Form. Asian J. Pharm. Anal…2012; 2(4): 106-109<\/li>
  19. Daharwal S. J. Development and validation of.,UV Spectrophotometric Methods for Simultaneous Estimation of  Diazepam  and Propranolol in Bulk drug and its formulation. Asian J. Pharm. Anal…2013; 3(1) : 20-23<\/li>
  20. Gupta S. K ,  KumarBabita,  Sharma P K. Development and validation of a Spectrophometric method for estimation of Triamcinolone in solid dosage form. Asian J. Pharm. Anal…..2013;3(2):42-43<\/li>
  21. Santhi. N,  Deepthi C.H,. Rajendran S. S. Spectrophotometric Estimation of Ziprasidone in Bulk and In Pharmaceutical Formulations . Asian J. Pharm. Anal….2011;1(1):8-9<\/li>
  22. Savale S.A.G.A.R., . Simultaneous determination of Curcumin and Gefitinib in pure form by using UV spectrophotometric method. Hygeia: journal for drugs and medicines<\/em>,2017  9<\/em>(1): pp.1-8.
    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>
  23. https:\/\/www.fws.gov\/aah\/PDF\/QI<\/li>
  24.  Goto T, Yoshida Y, Kiso M. Simultaneous analysis of individual catechins and caffeine in green tea. <\/strong>J. Chromatogr. A.1996;749(1-2): 295-299.doi.org\/10.1016\/0021-9673(96)00456-6
    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>
  25. https:\/\/sisu.ut.ee\/lcms_method_validation\/10-ruggedness-robustness<\/li>
  26. Rao T. N.  Validation of Analytical Methods. Calibration and Validation of Analytical Methods – A Sampling of Current Approaches.  .2018.doi.org\/ 10.5772\/intechopen.72087
    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>
  27. J. Chem. Technol. Metal.2010;17(3):229-232 .
    CrossRef<\/a><\/li>
  28. Asian J. Pharm. Anal…2013;3(2):42-43 <\/li><\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Introduction Unlike other types of wound injuries, burn wound injuries […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":15,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[111],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-52739","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-vol16no4"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52739","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=52739"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52739\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":55128,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/52739\/revisions\/55128"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=52739"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=52739"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/biomedpharmajournal.org\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=52739"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}