Journal of Neonatal Surgery

ISSN (Online): 2226 -0439

Vol. 14, Issue 10S (2025)
[Link]

Advanced Granulation and Formulation Strategies for Histamine H2 Receptor Antagonists in

Peptic Ulcer Disease Management

Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah1*, Ramya Teja Medarametla1, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar2, Chilakala Sahithi3,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna3, Gali Sathwik3, Gongati Sravani3, Kalluri Murali3

1*
Associate Professor, Department of Pharmaceutics, Narasaraopeta Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Narasaraopet,
Palnadu, Andhra Pradesh, India. Email: venkatgopi8789@[Link]
2
Principal & Professor, Department of Pharmaceutics, Narasaraopeta Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Narasaraopet,
Palnadu, Andhra Pradesh, India.
3
Research Scholar, Department of Pharmaceutics, Narasaraopeta Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Narasaraopet,
Palnadu, Andhra Pradesh, India.

*Corresponding Author:
Dr. K. Venkata Gopaiah
*Associate Professor, Narasaraopeta Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Narasaraopet.
Email ID: venkatgopi8789@[Link]
Cite this paper as: Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali, (2025) Advanced Granulation and
Formulation Strategies for Histamine H2 Receptor Antagonists in Peptic Ulcer Disease Management. Journal of Neonatal
Surgery, 14 (10s), 1000-1013

ABSTRACT
Present work seeks to formulate floating tablets of famotidine Hydrochloride employing HPMC K4M, HPMC K15M and
HPMC K100M polymers. The bulk density of the floating drug delivery systems is lower than the gastric fluid density
and therefore has the potential to be suspended in the gastric cavity for long durations of time although the rate of gastric
emptying is unaffected. Famotidine is classified as a histamine H2 receptor antagonist and it is on the World Health
Organization's Model List of Essential Medicines used for the treatment of peptic ulcer disease (PUD) and gastro
oesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Due to its short half-life, short gastric resorption time and multiple dosages any
formulator may suggest famotidine as an exceptional drug for formulating floating drug delivery systems. Famotidine
floating tablets were developed by using HPMC K4M, HPMC K15M and HPMC K100M by melt granulation technique.
The floating tablets were evaluated for following parameters: weight variation, hardness, friability, thickness, drug
content, in-vitro buoyancy, drug polymer compatibility (IR study), and in-vitro dissolution studies of tablets. The
micromeritic properties were observed to be satisfactory, the tablets were able to remain buoyant in the dissolution
medium and the in vitro release studies indicated a good and rapid release nature of the tablets. Formulation F4 of HPMC
K100M exhibited good in-vitro buoyancy lag time & floating time in which in lowering the density of all the formulations
and in-vitro dissolution showed 96.78% drug release in 12 hrs.

Keywords: HPMC K4M, HPMC K15M, HPMC K100M, GERD, PUD.

1. INTRODUCTION
Gastro-retentive drug delivery systems (GRDDS) are dosage forms designed to remain in the stomach for extended
periods, enabling controlled drug release at a steady rate. This approach is particularly beneficial for drugs with a narrow
absorption window, ensuring they are released at the site where they can be effectively absorbed over a prolonged duration.
Over the past few decades, oral controlled-release (CR) dosage forms have gained significant attention due to their
therapeutic benefits, including ease of use, enhanced patient compliance, and formulation flexibility. Despite these
advantages, CR systems face physiological challenges, such as inconsistent gastric emptying and motility, which can
affect their ability to stay in the desired region of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Additionally, the average gastric emptying

Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s

Pg 1000
 Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali

time in humans—typically 2 to 3 hours—may limit the amount of drug released and absorbed, particularly in the stomach
and upper intestine, which are critical zones for drug absorption. This limitation can lead to suboptimal therapeutic effects
[1,2]
.
To address these challenges, maintaining the drug delivery system in a specific region of the GI tract can provide
significant benefits. This is especially true for drugs with limited absorption windows or those prone to degradation in
certain GI conditions. By prolonging the gastric retention time, GRDDS can enhance the bioavailability and effectiveness
of such medications [3].

Gastric emptying and motility:

Gastric emptying occurs in both fasting and fed states and refers to the process by which substances move from the
stomach to the small intestine. This process plays a crucial role in drug absorption, as the small intestine is the primary
site for most drug absorption. Rapid gastric emptying can enhance drug bioavailability, especially for drugs that are
unstable in the acidic gastric environment and require faster action. On the other hand, delayed gastric emptying can
benefit drugs that are poorly soluble, primarily absorbed in the stomach, or in the upper part of the intestine, as it allows
more time for their dissolution and absorption [4, 5].
The motility of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract differs between the fasting and fed states. In the fasting state, a cyclic pattern
of electrical and muscular activity known as the migrating myoelectric complex (MMC) occurs. This cycle, lasting
approximately 2 to 3 hours, consists of four distinct phases [6-9]:
1. Phase I (Basal Phase): A period of minimal activity lasting 40 to 60 minutes, characterized by infrequent contractions.
2. Phase II (Pre-burst Phase): This phase lasts 40 to 60 minutes and is marked by intermittent contractions and action
potentials, with their intensity and frequency gradually increasing as the phase progresses.
3. Phase III (Burst Phase): Lasting 4 to 6 minutes, this phase features intense and regular contractions that sweep
undigested material from the stomach to the small intestine. It is also referred to as the "housekeeper wave."
4. Phase IV (Transition Phase): A brief phase lasting 0 to 5 minutes that marks the transition between Phase III and the
next cycle’s Phase I.
In the fed state, the motility pattern changes, transitioning from the fasting MMC to the fed or digestive motility pattern.
This state is characterized by continuous contractions similar to those in Phase II of the fasting state. These contractions
aid in breaking down food particles into smaller sizes (less than 1 mm) and propel them toward the pylorus in suspension
form. The onset of the MMC is delayed during the fed state, slowing the gastric emptying rate [10].
Scintigraphy studies assessing gastric emptying rates have demonstrated that controlled-release dosage forms
administered orally encounter two significant challenges: limited gastric residence time and variability in gastric emptying
rates. These factors can influence the drug’s effectiveness and therapeutic outcomes.
Gastric Transit time [11, 12]:
The transit time of a gastrointestinal drug delivery system through the GI tract is a critical physiological factor influencing
the development of controlled-release drug delivery systems. The transit pattern varies depending on whether the stomach
is in a fasted or fed state, as illustrated in Figure 1.

Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s

Pg 1001
 Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali

Fig no. 01- Phase cycle Requirements for gastric retention:

For successful gastric retention, certain physiological factors must be considered. To remain in the stomach, the dosage
form must meet specific criteria. A primary requirement is its ability to endure the mechanical forces generated by
peristaltic waves, as well as the continuous contractions, grinding, and churning actions of the stomach. Additionally, to
serve effectively as a gastric retention system, the device must resist premature gastric emptying. Once its function is
fulfilled, the system should exit the stomach smoothly without causing discomfort or complications [13-16].
SUITABLE DRUG CANDIDATES FOR GRDDS [17-20]
Controlled-release gastro-retentive drug delivery systems (CRGRDDS) are most suitable for drugs with poor absorption
in the colon but better absorption in the upper gastrointestinal tract (GIT). The following categories of drugs are ideal
candidates for CRGRDDS:
• Drugs that act locally in the stomach: Examples include antacids and medications for Helicobacter pylori infection,
such as Misoprostol.
• Drugs primarily absorbed in the stomach: Examples include Amoxicillin.
• Drugs with poor solubility in alkaline pH: Examples include Furosemide, Diazepam, and Verapamil.
• Drugs with a narrow absorption window: Examples include Cyclosporine, Methotrexate, Riboflavin, and Levodopa.
• Drugs rapidly absorbed in the GIT: Examples include Metronidazole and Tetracycline.
• Drugs absorbed predominantly in the stomach and upper GIT: Examples include calcium supplements,
Chlordiazepoxide, and Cinnarizine.
• Drugs that degrade in the colon: Examples include Ranitidine, Metformin HCl, and Metronidazole.
• Drugs that disrupt normal colonic microbial flora: Examples include Amoxicillin trihydrate, an antibiotic effective
against Helicobacter pylori.

Drugs Unsuitable for GRDDS [21, 22]

Certain drugs are not ideal for gastro-retentive systems due to specific limitations:
• Drugs with minimal solubility in acidic environments: For example, Phenytoin.
• Drugs unstable in gastric conditions: For example, Erythromycin.
Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s
Pg 1002
 Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali

• Drugs requiring targeted release in the colon: For example, 5-Aminosalicylic acid and Corticosteroids.
Formulation Considerations for GRDDS [23, 24]
When designing gastro-retentive drug delivery systems, the following factors should be taken into account:
1. The system must achieve effective gastric retention to meet clinical needs.
2. It should have adequate drug loading capacity.
3. The drug release profile must be well-controlled.
4. The system should fully degrade and evacuate once drug release is complete.
5. It should not interfere with gastric motility, including the gastric emptying pattern.
6. The system must not cause adverse local effects in the stomach.

Floating drug delivery systems [25-28]

Floating drug delivery systems (FDDS) are designed to have a lower density than gastric fluids, allowing them to float on
the stomach's contents. This floating capability ensures that the system remains in the stomach for an extended period
without significantly influencing the gastric emptying rate. While floating, the drug is released gradually at a controlled
rate, leading to prolonged gastric residence time (GRT) and more consistent plasma drug concentrations.
For FDDS to function effectively, it must form a cohesive gel barrier and maintain a specific gravity lower than gastric
fluids (1.004–1.010). Additionally, the system should dissolve or degrade slowly, ensuring it acts as a drug reservoir for
the intended duration.

Types of Floating Drug Delivery Systems [29-32]

FDDS can be categorized based on the mechanism that enables buoyancy. Two primary approaches are used in their
design:
1. Non-Effervescent FDDS: These systems utilize hydrophilic polymers to form a gel-like structure that traps air or
liquid, keeping the dosage form afloat.
2. Effervescent FDDS: These systems rely on the generation of gas (such as carbon dioxide) upon reaction with gastric
fluids, which helps the dosage form remain buoyant.

FORMULATION INGREDIENTS OF FLOATING DOSAGE FORM [33, 34]

Following types of the ingredients can be incorporated in to floating dosage form,
a) Hydrocolloids
b) Inert fatty materials
c) Release rate accelerants
d) Release rate retardant
e) Buoyancy increasing agents
f) Low density material
g) Miscellaneous

EVALUATION PARAMETERS OF FDDS [35-38]

Various studies in the literature suggest that pharmaceutical dosage forms demonstrating floating behavior in vitro tend
to show prolonged gastric residence in vivo. However, it is important to note that good in vitro floating performance does
not automatically guarantee effective gastric retention in vivo. The simultaneous presence of food and the complex
motility of the stomach can significantly influence the system's behavior, making it challenging to predict in vitro results
with certainty. Only well-conducted in vivo studies can definitively confirm whether prolonged gastric residence is
achieved.

Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s

Pg 1003
 Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali

Key Parameters for Floating Drug Delivery Systems

1. Floating Time
2. Drug Release Profile
3. Drug Loading Capacity
4. Drug Entrapment Efficiency
5. Particle Size Distribution
6. Surface Characterization (for floating microspheres and beads)

Methodology and Formulation Steps: [39, 40]

1. Sieving: Accurately weigh all the ingredients. Famotidine is sieved through mesh size 80, and HPMC K4, HPMC
K15, and HPMC K100 are also sieved using mesh size 80.
2. Melting: Melt white beeswax in a China dish.
3. Mixing: Add the Famotidine drug to the molten beeswax and mix thoroughly. Then, incorporate HPMC polymers,
sodium bicarbonate, and lactose into the mixture and blend well.
4. Granulation: Allow the mass to cool to room temperature, then scrape it from the China dish. The cohesive mass is
passed through sieve no. 20.
5. Lubrication: The granules are mixed with magnesium stearate and talc for lubrication.
6. Compression: The lubricated granules are compressed into tablets using a standard concave punch on a 10-station
rotary Proton mini press machine, aiming for an average weight of 200 mg. After compression, tests for weight variation,
friability, dissolution, and assay are conducted. The formulations from F1 to F8 are listed in Table 1.

Table no. 01- Formulation of Famotidine tablets

INGREDIENTS FORMULATION BATCHES

(in mg) F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8
Famotidine 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
HPMC K4M 0 30 0 0 30 30 0 30
HPMC K15M 0 0 30 0 30 0 30 30
HPMC K100M 0 0 0 30 0 30 30 30
NaHCO3 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Bees wax 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Lactose 98 68 68 68 38 38 38 8
Magnesium stearate 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
Talc 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
Average weight 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200

2. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Drug-Excipient Compatibility Studies:
Table no. 02- Drug-excipient compatibility

After 1 month at
Drug + Excipients Initial Compatible
400C/75%RH 600C

Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s

Pg 1004
 Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali

Drug White powder No change No change Yes

Drug + HPMC K4 M White powder No change No change Yes
Drug + HPMC K15 M White powder No change No change Yes
Drug + HPMC K100 M White powder No change No change Yes

Fig. no. 02- FTIR of Famotidine

Fig. no. 03- FTIR of Famotidine and Excipients

3. DISCUSSION
The FT-IR spectra demonstrated that there were no significant changes in the peaks, indicating that no interactions
occurred between the drug and the excipients. This suggests compatibility between the drug and the polymers used in the
formulation. The FT-IR analysis plays an essential role in understanding how the drug and excipients interact, which can
affect drug release properties.

Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s

Pg 1005
 Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali

Granule Evaluation:
Table no. 03. Showing results of angle of repose, bulk and tapped density, Carr’s index, Hausner’s ratio

Batch no. Angle of repose (0) Bulk density (gm/ml) Tapped density (gm/ ml) Carr’s index (%) Hausner ratio
F1 26 o 32' 0.2891 0.3503 14.04 1.21
F2 24o 64' 0.2845 0.3394 15.68 1.22
F3 28o 59' 0.2924 0.3349 11.94 1.13
F4 26o12' 0.2875 0.3446 13.96 1.16
F5 23o 62' 0.2862 0.3420 15.13 1.19
F6 24o74' 0.2677 0.3214 13.92 1.15
F7 24 o 77' 0.2743 0.3242 15.42 1.19
F8 26 o 56' 0.2847 0.3177 10.38 1.11

4. DISCUSSION
The angle of repose for the formulations F1-F8 ranged from 23.06° to 28.59°, indicating good flow properties. The
compressibility index for the formulations F1-F8 was between 10.38% and 15.6%, suggesting that the blend is suitable
for compression with good flow characteristics. These results are summarized in Table 3.

Evaluation of Famotidine Tablets:

Table no. 04- weight variation, Friability, Content Uniformity, Thickness, Hardness, Bouncy Lag Time and
Floating Time
Batch no. Weight Friability Content Thickness Hardness Buoyancy lag Total buoyancy
variation uniformity (mm) (kg/cm2) time time (hrs.)
F1 + 1.52 0.23 99.65 5.2+0.01 6.2 624 15
F2 ±2.37 0.34 99.74 5.1+0.02 7.1 96 3
F3 + 1.87 0.21 98.34 5.3+0.01 6.5 90 6
F4 + 1.41 0.27 99.44 5.1+0.03 6.9 84 12
F5 ±1.86 0.18 100.38 5.2+0.01 6.3 171 5
F6 ±2.56 0.28 99.96 5.3+0.04 7.2 63 10
F7 +2.35 0.29 99.47 5.5+0.01 7.5 44 15
F8 ±1.93 0.19 99.35 5.3+0.01 6.4 39 14

5. DISCUSSION
The weight variation of the tablets ranged from +1.23% to +3.09%, which is within the acceptable limits (less than 5%)
as per pharmacopoeial standards. The friability was between 0.18% and 0.34%, complying with the pharmacopoeial
standard of being less than 1%. The content uniformity of the tablets ranged from 99.37% to 100.38%, meeting the
required standards. The thickness of the formulations ranged from 5.1 ± 0.01 mm to 5.5 ± 0.01 mm, and the hardness was
between 6.2 and 7.5 kg/cm², indicating satisfactory mechanical strength. Among all the formulations, F1, F4, F7, and F8
exhibited good buoyancy, with all formulations showing buoyancy for up to 12 hours. The data is provided in Table 4.

In-Vitro Release Profile:

Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s

Pg 1006
 Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali

Table no. 05- In-vitro release profile

Time (hrs) F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 F7 F8
8.65 24.79 15.13 7.24 21.32 13.76 5.91 12.25
2 13.12 58.12 34.67 12.09 43.13 24.27 11.64 16.79
3 17.75 90.39 46.21 17.62 67.08 30.14 17.08 22.47
4 25.34 63.90 23.98 91.34 39.51 25.42 26.75
5 29.59 76.39 31.56 46.24 29.32 30.54
6 34.23 92.14 39.34 53.69 31.13 37.67
7 41.09 47.87 67.76 36.41 43.34
8 47.23 55.23 80.09 40.69 49.50
9 53.98 64.42 89.13 46.86 54.71
10 58.14 73.76 92.43 53.63 60.92
11 61.17 84.54 57.20 68.43
12 67.91 96.78 62.32 72.19

6. DISCUSSION
The in-vitro drug release studies for all formulations (F1 to F8) are shown in Table 5. The formulations were designed for
sustained drug release, with some formulations like F2, F3, and F5 releasing the drug within 6 hours, while F6 released
the drug up to the 10th hour. The desired sustained release formulation was selected based on a target release duration of
at least 12 hours. Formulation F4 was chosen as the best formulation because it showed a controlled release profile. The
in-vitro release data for F4 is summarized in Table 5, and the release profile is shown in Figure 4.

Fig no. 04- Showing in-vitro drug release profile for F1-F8 formulations

In-Vitro Release Profile of Best Formulation (F4):

Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s

Pg 1007
 Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali

Fig no. 05-In-Vitro Release Profile of Formulation-F4

DRUG RELEASE KINETICS:

Time Cumulative % Drug Square root Log Cumu % Log time Log Cumu % Drug
(Hr.) % Drug released remaining time Drug % Drug Released
remaining released
0 0 100 0.000 2.000 0.000 0.000 100
1 7.24 92.76 1.000 1.967 0.000 0.860 7.24
2 12.09 87.91 1.414 1.944 0.301 1.082 4.85
3 17.62 82.38 1.732 1.916 0.477 1.246 5.53
4 23.98 76.02 2.000 1.881 0.602 1.380 6.36
5 31.56 68.44 2.236 1.835 0.699 1.499 7.58
6 39.34 60.66 2.449 1.783 0.778 1.595 7.78
7 47.87 52.13 2.646 1.717 0.845 1.680 8.53
8 55.23 44.77 2.828 1.651 0.903 1.742 7.36
9 64.42 35.58 3.000 1.551 0.954 1.809 9.19
10 73.7 26.3 3.162 1.420 1.000 1.867 9.28
11 84.54 15.46 3.317 1.189 1.041 1.927 10.84
12 96.78 3.22 3.464 0.508 1.079 1.986 12.24

Table. No. 06- Drug release kinetics

Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s

Pg 1008
 Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali

Fig no. 06- Zero Order Kinetic Model

Fig no. 07- First Order Kinetic Model

Fig no. 08- Higuchi Model Fig no. 09- Korsmeyer Peppas Model

7. DISCUSSION
The drug release kinetics for formulation F4 were analysed, and the results are presented in Table 6. The drug release
followed zero-order, first-order, Higuchi, and Korsmeyer-Peppas models, as shown in Figures 6-9. The release exponent
(n) value was 0.8274, indicating that the drug release follows non-Fickian diffusion. This data is further supported by the
regression coefficient values provided in Table 7.

Table no. 07- Regression coefficient of F4

Regression coefficient (R2 ) value
Formulation Zero-order First order Higuchi Korsmeyer – Peppas (n value)
Famotidine tablets 0.9955 0.7328 0.9684 0.84 (0.8274)

Buoyancy Effect of the Formulation (F4):

Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s

Pg 1009
 Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali

Tablet after 01-mint Tablet after 05-Mints

Table at 0 mint
Fig no. 10- Buoyancy table of Formulation F4
Discussion:
The buoyancy of formulation F4 was observed at different time intervals (0, 1, and 5 minutes) and is depicted in Figure
10.

8. SUMMARY
This study focuses on the formulation and evaluation of gastro-retentive drug delivery systems for Famotidine tablets.
These systems are designed to prolong the retention of the drug in the stomach by utilizing swelling properties, preventing
premature gastric emptying. Preformulation studies, including organoleptic properties, bulk density, Carr’s index,
Hausner’s ratio, melting point, pH, and solubility, were conducted as per the IP specifications. Drug-excipient
compatibility studies confirmed no significant interaction between the drug and the excipients. Tablet evaluation for
weight variation, friability, hardness, content uniformity, and buoyancy showed that the formulations met the
pharmacopoeial standards. In-vitro release studies were carried out using 0.1N HCl, and formulation F4, which used
HPMC K100 M, demonstrated the best sustained release profile with drug release up to 12 hours.

9. CONCLUSION
Floating tablets with sustained release properties offer significant advantages, such as site-specific drug delivery,
improved absorption, and enhanced efficacy. The technology is simple, easy to adopt, and can be applied to various drugs
with poor bioavailability due to limited absorption in the upper gastrointestinal tract. This approach can enhance
absorption and improve the bioavailability of these drugs. Furthermore, floating drug delivery systems can be employed
in the development of therapies for diseases such as gastric and duodenal cancers, offering a beneficial treatment strategy.

Conflicts of Interest: Nil.

REFERENCES
1. Norman J, Madurawe RD, Moore CMV, Khan MA, Khairuzzaman A. A new chapter in pharmaceutical
manufacturing: 3D-printed drug products. Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2017 Jan 1;108:39–50. doi:
10.1016/[Link].2016.03.001.

2. Gopaiah K. V., Kumar J. N. S., Teja M. R., Lokesh T., Sruthi D. S., Roja M., Rushitha N., Vahedunnisa S. K.,
"Development and Assessment of Hydroxypropyl Methylcellulose-Based Floating Tablets for Ciprofloxacin HCL
Using Direct Compression Technique," Journal of Pharmaceutical Research International, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 47–62,
2024.

3. S. Budavari, M. O’Neil, A. Smith, P. Heckelman, and J. Obenchain, The Merck index : an encyclopedia of chemicals,
drugs, and biologicals, 12th ed. Whitehouse Station NJ: Merck, 1996.
Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s
Pg 1010
 Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali

4. Z. Fedorowicz, E. J. van Zuuren, and N. Hu, “Histamine H2-receptor antagonists for urticaria,” Cochrane Database
of Systematic Reviews, vol. 2012, no. 3, Mar. 2012, doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008596.pub2.

5. Gopaiah K. V., Gowtham M., Pracheta K., "Development and assessment of Rapid-Dissolving Enalapril Malate
Tablets Utilizing Co-Processed Super Disintegrates," International Journal of Innovation Scientific Research and
Review, vol. 6, no. 10, pp. 7181–7185, 2024.

6. Formlabs. Stereolithography (SLA) 3D Printing Guide. Available from: [Link]

stereolithography-sla-3d-printing/ [Accessed Mar. 15, 2022].

7. Gopaiah K. V., Ramya Teja M., Kumar J. N. S., Kilari N., Nelapati V. S., Vellaturi P., Irfan J. S., Manjula P.,
"Innovations and Techniques in Oral Controlled Release Systems: A Comprehensive Review of Tablet
Characterization Methods," Journal of Current Pharma Research, vol. 20, no. 9, pp. 16–24, 2024.

8. Nano-DI. The 3D Inkjet Printing Process Explained. Available from: [Link]

inkjet-printing-process-explained [Accessed Mar. 15, 2022].

9. Gopaiah K. V., Gowtham M., Pracheta K., Ramya Teja M., "Synergistic Elegance: Harnessing Liposomes as
Advanced Cosmetic Drug Delivery Systems with Phospholipids and Phenolic Components," Pharmaceutical
Sciences & Analytical Research Journal, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 1–8, 2024.
10. Gopaiah K. V., Medarametala R. T., Kumar J. N. S., Sahithi C., Prasanna D. E., Sathwik G., Sravani G., Murali K.,
"Comprehensive analysis of Nizatidine: Pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics in anti-ulcer treatment," World
Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 2260–2266, 2024.
11. Maniruzzaman M, et al. A Review of Hot-Melt Extrusion: Process Technology to Pharmaceutical Products. ISRN
Pharmaceutics. 2012;2012:436763. doi: 10.5402/2012/436763.
12. Patil H, Tiwari RV, Repka MA. Hot-Melt Extrusion: from Theory to Application in Pharmaceutical Formulation.
AAPS PharmSciTech. 2016 Feb;17(1):20–42. doi: 10.1208/s12249-015-0360-7.
13. Gopaiah K. V., Kolli P., Mandadapu G., "Solid Lipid Nanoparticles of Naftopidil: Formulation Design & In Vitro
Evaluation for Improved Oral Absorption," Pharmaceutical Sciences & Analytical Research Journal, vol. 6, no. 2,
pp. 180061, 2024.

14. Lepowsky E, Tasoglu S. 3D printing for drug manufacturing: A perspective on the future of pharmaceuticals. Int J
Bioprinting. 2018;4(1):119. doi: 10.18063/IJB.v4i1.119.

15. Mohamed OA, Masood SH, Bhowmik JL. Optimization of fused deposition modeling process parameters: a review
of current research and future prospects. Adv Manuf. 2015 Mar;3(1):42–53. doi: 10.1007/s40436-014-0097-7.

16. Gopaiah K. V., Mandadapu G., Kolli P., "Impact of Metformin on Cardiac Autonomic Function in Recently
Diagnosed Type-2 Diabetic Patients at a Specialized Medical Center," TIJER - International Research Journal, vol.
11, no. 5, pp. b331–b336, 2024.
17. Medarametla R. T., Gopaiah K. V., Kumar J. N. S., Sai A. K., Chari G. M., Kiran A. K., Naik B. K., Rani K. S.,
"Clinical Investigation of Valsartan Sustained-Release Matrix Tablets: Formulation Design and Performance
Evaluation," Journal of Pharmaceutical Research International, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 39–54, 2024.
18. Mandadapu G., Kolli P., Gopaiah K. V., "Formulation of fenofibrate capsules by dropping method using PEG 6000
and PEG 4000 to enhance solubility," World Journal of Biology Pharmacy and Health Sciences, vol. 19, no. 1, pp.
95–102, 2024.

Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s

Pg 1011
 Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali

19. Chukka A. K., Gopaiah V., Chowdary D., Irfan J. S., "A review of synthesis, biological activity, & docking studies
of anti-tubercular agents," Journal of Innovations in Applied Pharmaceutical Science, pp. 45–50, Dec. 2023.
20. Medarametla R., Gopaiah V., Ch G., Neelima L., Reddy A., Sudheer B., "Formulation and evaluation of tenoxicam
ethosomes as a novel drug carrier," UPI Journal of Pharmaceutical, Medical and Health Sciences, pp. 12–18, Nov.
2023.
21. Medarametla R. T., Gopaiah V., "A comprehensive study on the review of virosomes as a novel drug delivery
system," UPI Journal of Pharmaceutical, Medical and Health Sciences, vol. 1, no. 6, pp. 1–6, Oct. 2023.
22. Gopaiah V., Brahmam G., Harika R., Pujitha V., "Formulation & Evaluation of Cefuroxime Oral suspension for
Pediatrics," International Journal of Current Innovations in Advanced Research, pp. 60–67, Apr. 2023.
23. Gopaiah K. V., Mandadapu G., Kolli P., "A Study on Method Development for Detection of Different Viral
Antibodies and Virus by Using RT-PCR Method," World Journal of Pharmaceutical Research, vol. 12, no. 4, pp.
316–333, Mar. 2023.
24. Nanodimension. The 3D printing process explained. Available from: [Link]
inkjet-printing-process-explained [Accessed Feb. 22, 2022].
25. Gopaiah K. V., Mandadapu G., Kolli P., Bhavana T., "Diagnosing Feline & Canine Disease by RT-PCR Screens,"
International Journal of Research and Analytical Review, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 590–603, Feb. 2023.
26. Gopaiah K. V., Mandadapu G., Kolli P., Patibandal S., "A Clinical Study on Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary
Disorder," Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. b393–b453, Oct. 2023.
27. Mandadapu G., Kolli P., Gopaiah K. V., "Formulation and Evaluation of Econazole nitrate Nanoemulsion for Fungal
Topical Use," Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research, 2024.
28. Shrivastava B., "Topical combination delivery of benzoyl peroxide and adapalene niosomal gel for acne treatment,"
Asian Journal of Pharmaceutics, vol. 13, no. 4, Nov. 2019.
29. Gopaiah M. K., "Design, formulation, and evaluation of sustained release tablets for antihyperlipidemic agent,"
Asian Journal of Pharmaceutics, vol. 12, no. 4, Nov. 2018.

30. Melocchi, F. Parietti, A. Maroni, A. Foppoli, A. Gazzaniga, and L. Zema, “Hot- melt extruded filaments based on
pharmaceutical grade polymers for 3D printing by fused deposition modeling,” Int J Pharm, vol. 509, no. 1–2, pp.
255–263, Jul. 2016, doi: 10.1016/[Link].2016.05.036.

31. Awad, S. J. Trenfield, S. Gaisford, and A. W. Basit, “3D printed medicines: A new branch of digital healthcare,” Int
J Pharm, vol. 548, no. 1, pp. 586–596, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.1016/[Link].2018.07.024.

32. Mandadapu G., Kolli P., Gopaiah K. V., "Formulation and Evaluation of Econazole nitrate Nanoemulsion for Fungal
Topical Use," World Journal of Pharmaceutical Research, 2024.
33. Gopaiah K. V., Kumar J. N. S., Teja M. R., "Development and Assessment of Hydroxypropyl Methylcellulose-Based
Floating Tablets for Ciprofloxacin HCL Using Direct Compression Technique," Journal of Pharmaceutical Research
International, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 47–62, 2024.
34. Mandadapu G., Kolli P., Gopaiah K. V., Bhavana T., "Diagnosing Feline & Canine Disease by RT-PCR Screens,"
International Journal of Research and Analytical Review, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 590–603, Feb. 2023.
35. Medarametla R. T., Gopaiah K. V., Kumar J. N. S., "Clinical Investigation of Valsartan Sustained-Release Matrix
Tablets: Formulation Design and Performance Evaluation," Journal of Pharmaceutical Research International, vol.
36, no. 2, pp. 39–54, Mar. 2024.

Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s

Pg 1012
 Dr. K Venkata Gopaiah, Ramya Teja Medarametla, Dr. J N Suresh Kumar, Chilakala Sahithi,
Dhanankula Eswari Sai Prasanna, Gali Sathwik, Gongati Sravani, Kalluri Murali

36. Gopaiah K. V., Medarametala R. T., Kumar J. S., "Comprehensive analysis of nizatidine: Pharmacodynamics and
pharmacokinetics in anti-ulcer treatment," World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews, vol. 23, no. 3, pp.
2260–2266, 2024.

37. Trenfield SJ, Awad A, Goyanes A, Gaisford S, Basit AW. 3D Printing Pharmaceuticals: Drug Development to
Frontline Care. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2018 May;39(5):440–51. doi: 10.1016/[Link].2018.02.006.

38. Melocchi, F. Parietti, A. Maroni, A. Foppoli, A. Gazzaniga, and L. Zema, “Hot- melt extruded filaments based on
pharmaceutical grade polymers for 3D printing by fused deposition modeling,” Int J Pharm, vol. 509, no. 1–2, pp.
255–263, Jul. 2016, doi: 10.1016/[Link].2016.05.036.

39. Awad, S. J. Trenfield, S. Gaisford, and A. W. Basit, “3D printed medicines: A new branch of digital healthcare,” Int
J Pharm, vol. 548, no. 1, pp. 586–596, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.1016/[Link].2018.07.024.

40. P. O. Talke and D. R. Solanki, “Dose-response study of oral famotidine for reduction of gastric acidity and volume
in outpatients and inpatients,” Anesth Analg, vol. 77, no. 6, pp. 1143–1148, 1993, doi: 10.1213/00000539-
199312000- 00011.

Journal of Neonatal Surgery| Year:2025 |Volume:14 |Issue:10s

Pg 1013