Pharmacopoeial and physicochemical properties of α-cellulose and microcrystalline cellulose powders derived from cornstalks

Abstract

Background: Suitable α-cellulose and microcrystalline cellulose powders for use in the pharmaceutical industry can be derived from agricultural wastes. Aims: The pharmacopoeial and physicochemical properties of cornstalk α-cellulose (CCC) and cornstalk microcrystalline cellulose powders (MCCC) were compared to a commercial brand of microcrystalline cellulose (Avicel PH101) to evaluate their usefulness as pharmaceutical excipients. Settings and Design: Physicochemical properties of an excipient play a very crucial role in the functions of the excipient; hence, these properties were evaluated and compared with a commercial brand. Materials and Methods: α-cellulose was extracted from cornstalks. Modification of this α-cellulose powder was carried out by its partial hydrolysis with hydrochloric acid (HCl) to obtain a microcrystalline cellulose powder. Their pharmacopoeial, physicochemical and microbiological properties were evaluated using standard methods. Statistical Analysis: OriginPro 8 SR2 v. 0891 (B891) software (OriginLab Corporation USA) was used for statistical evaluation. One-way analysis of variance was used to differentiate between samples and decide where significant differences were established. Results: The yield of α-cellulose from the cornstalks was 32.5%w/w and that of microcrystalline cellulose 26%w/w. All the cellulose samples met all the pharmacopoeial parameters that were carried out. The comparison of physicochemical properties of the CCC, MCCC and Avicel PH101 suggests that the microcrystalline celluloses might have better flow and compression properties than the CCC sample. The three cellulose powders were of high microbial excipient quality. For almost all parameters evaluated, it was generally observed that the MCCC has similar characteristics to Avicel PH101. Conclusions: MCCC can be a suitable alternative to the expensive Avicel PH101as pharmaceutical excipients.

Preparation and Comparative Evaluation of Physicochemical Properties of Microcrystalline Cellulose Derived from Saccharum officinarum L (Poaceae) with Avicel(R) PH102

“…The results of the true density of SO-MCC as shown in Table 1 showed that the difference between SO-MCC and Avicel PH 102 were not significant. The higher values of true density for SO-MCC compared to the Avicel PH 102 suggests that the SO-MCC might exhibit better compressibility [22].…”

Effect of drying methods on the powder and compaction properties of microcrystalline cellulose derived from Gossypium herbaceum

“…The porosity of MCC-GossL was the highest while that of MCC-GossF was the least. These high porosity characteristic would impair the free flow of these materials (Azubuike, Odulaja, Okhamafe, 2012). Considering the angle of repose (Table II) the powders were classified as excellent.…”

“…Some commercial brands of MCC such as Avicel®, Emcocel®, Comprecel® and Microcel® may show variations in the degree of crysrallinity, moisture content, surface area, porous structure, and molecular weight. These physical differences possessed by each brand would affect the products functionality when used as an excipient (Azubuike, Odulaja, Okhamafe, 2012).…”

Efficient utilization of corn stalk and poplar planer shavings in manufacturing particleboard

“…Corn demand has been increased throughout the years to satisfy human consumption resulting in important lignocelluloses residues which could be utilized as raw material to manufacture particleboard and papers They are cheap, ready available, renewable lignocellulosic source, biodegradable from nature, excellent source of cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin and good fibers structure in terms of length and diameter (Azubuike et al 2012). It is reported that hemicellulose content is higher and the lignin content lower in straw and stalks materials (Rowell et al 2000.…”