Comparison of post-processing methods for liposomal preparations using different techniques
https://doi.org/10.18705/2311-4495-2025-12-6-562-575
Abstract
Background. Liposome size and polydispersity index are key factors determining the subsequent use of nanoparticles. Traditional synthesis methods do not allow the creation of liposomes of the required size and homogeneity; therefore, post-processing is performed using ultrasound or extrusion.
Objective. To compare two methods of liposome post-processing: ultrasound and extrusion. To compare the efficiency of two different extruders: Liposofast LF-50 and a proprietary extruder. To compare the efficiency of three membranes made of different materials: polycarbonate, polyethersulfone, and porous anodic alumina, using the extrusion post-processing method.
Materials and Methods. Commercially available reagents were used for liposome synthesis: phospholipids, cholesterol, and vitamin E (all from Sigma Aldrich, Germany). The physicochemical properties of liposomes were studied using a Zetasizer Ultra (Malvern Instruments, UK). Ultrasonic post-processing was performed using a UZG13-0.1/22 disperser (Russia), extrusion processing was carried out using one of two extruders: Liposofast LF-50 (Avestin, Canada) and an extruder of our own design (Nanotechnologies). The following membranes were used: polycarbonate (PC) 200 nm (Nuclepore, Whatman), polyethersulfone (PES) 200 nm (FMPES-0.20, Vladisart), and experimental membrane samples based on porous anodic aluminum oxide (PAO). To determine differences in membrane morphology, they were examined using a Quanta Inspect scanning electron microscope (FEI, USA).
Results. PC-based membranes are the most uniform, while PES is the least uniform. All membranes have a declared pore diameter of 200 nm, but only for PAOA is this parameter close to the actual value. PAOA membranes have the highest porosity, while polycarbonate membranes have the lowest. Differentpressures are required for the liposomal colloidal solution to pass through the membranes: 1.5–2 atm is sufficient for PES membranes, 5 atm for PC membranes, and 4–6 atm for PAOA membranes, which significantly affects the extrusion rate.
Conclusion. A comparison of existing liposome homogenization methods demonstrated the advantage of extrusion. The extruder developed by the authors is comparable to a commercial version. The effectiveness of PAOA membranes compared to commercial analogues is demonstrated.
Keywords
About the Authors
A. I. NikiforovRussian Federation
Alexey I. Nikiforov, Junior Research Fellow
Nanotechnology Research Laboratory
St. Petersburg
Competing Interests:
The authors declare no conflict of interest
I. E. Anufriev
Russian Federation
Ilya E. Anufriev, Junior Research Fellow
Nanotechnology Research Laboratory
St. Petersburg
Competing Interests:
The authors declare no conflict of interest
V. V. Trushlyakova
Russian Federation
Valentina V. Trushlyakova, Candidate of Technical Sciences, Associate Professor, Research Fellow
Department of Micro- and Nano-electronics; Center for Collective Use “Center for Microsystems Technology and Electronic Component Base”
St. Petersburg
Competing Interests:
The authors declare no conflict of interest
R. G. Valeev
Russian Federation
Rishat G. Valeev, Research Fellow
Laboratory of Atomic Structure and Surface Analysis
Izhevsk
Competing Interests:
The authors declare no conflict of interest
D. V. Korolev
Russian Federation
Dmitrii V. Korolev, Doctor of Chemical Sciences, Associate Professor, Head of the Laboratory, Research Fellow
Nanotechnology Research Laboratory
194156; 15 B Parchomenko ave.; St. Petersburg
Competing Interests:
The authors declare no conflict of interest
References
1. Li Z, Peng S, Chen X, et al. Effect of dynamic high pressure microfluidization on structure and stability of Pluronic F127 modified liposomes. Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology. 2019;40(7):982–989. doi: 10.1080/01932691.2018.1489281
2. Schroeded A, Kost J, Barenholz Y. Ultrasound, liposomes, and drug delivery: principles for using ultrasound to control release of drugs from liposomes. Chemistry and physics of lipids. 2009;162(1–2):1–16. doi: 10.1016/j.chemphyslip.2009.08.003
3. Burnard D, Monnier CA, Rothen-Rutinshauser B, et al. Magnetoliposomes: opportunities and challenges. European journal of nanomedicine. 2014;6(4):201–215. doi: 10.1515/ejnm-2014-0042
4. Shah VM, Nguyen DX, Patel P, et al. Liposomes produced by microfluidics and extrusion: a comparison for scale-up purposes. Nanomedicine. 2019;18:146–156. doi: 10.1016/j.nano.2019.02.019
5. Mui BL, Cullis PR, Evans EA, et al. Osmotic properties of large unilamellar vesicles prepared by extrusion. Biophys. J. 1993;64(2):443–453. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(93)81385-7
6. Cho NJ, Hwang LY, Solandt JJR, et al. Comparison of extruded and sonicated vesicles for planar bilayer self-assembly. Materials. 2013;6(8):3294–3308. doi: 10.3390/ma6083294
7. Singh B, Mundlamuri R, Friese T, Mundrigi A, Handt S, Loewe T. Benchmarking of sterilizing-grade filter membranes with liposome filtration. PDA J Pharm Sci Technol. 2018;72(3):223–235. doi: 10.5731/pdajpst.2017.007757
8. Ong SG, Chitneni M, Lee KS, et al. Evaluation of Extrusion Technique for Nanosizing Liposomes. Pharmaceutics. 2016;8(4):36. doi: 10.3390/pharmaceutics8040036
9. Zourna K, Iwaniec A, Turner S, et al. Optimizing the filtration of liposomes using sterilizing-grade filters. PDA J Pharm Sci Technol. 2021;75(2):128–140. doi: 10.5731/pdajpst.2020.011866
10. Anufriev IE, Muratova EN, Korolev DV, et al. Development of a manual extruder for liposome homogenization. Physical and chemical aspects of the study of clusters, nanostructures and nanomaterials. 2022;14:8–16. (In Russ.) doi: 10.26456/pcascnn/2022.14.008; https://elibrary.ru/ORWNGY
11. Peyret A, Ibarboure E, Pippa N, Lecommandoux S. Liposomes in polymersomes: multicompartment system with temperature-triggered release. Langmuir. 2017;33:7079−7085. doi: 10.1021/acs.langmuir.7b00655
12. Zhu TF, Budin I, Szostak JW. Vesicle extrusion through polycarbonate track-etched membranes using a hand-held mini-extruder. Methods Enzymol. 2013;533:275–282. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-420067-8.00021-0
13. Dmitrieva MV, Lugen B, Oborotova NA, et al. Extrusion method in the technology preparation of liposomes. Proceedings of Voronezh State University. Series: Chemistry. Biology. Pharmacy. 2020;3:87–96. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/XUUGKU
14. Nikiforov AI, Shulmeyster GA, Istomina MS, et al. Preparation of liposomes with an encapsulat ed cardioprotector, study of physicochemical properties, release kinetics and biodistribution in vivo. Translational Medicine. 2025;12(3):256–267. (In Russ.) doi: 10.18705/2311-4495-2025-12-3-256-267; https://elibrary.ru/OSPQRW
15. Korolev DV, Shulmeyster GA, Istomina MS, et al. Indocyanine green-containing magnetic liposomes for constant magnetic field-guided targeted delivery and theranostics. Magnetochemistry. 2022;8:127. doi: 10.3390/magnetochemistry8100127
16. Gribanova EV, Larionov MI, Vasyutin OA, Kuchek AE. Dependence of contact angle on ph of solution for oxide film on the surface of. Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Physics. Chemistry. 2012;4(1):76–81. (In Russ.) https://elibrary.ru/OQSLEV
17. Wang N, ZhangW, Xu J, et al. Initial stage of pore formation process in anodic aluminium oxide template. Journal of Solid State Electrochemistry. 2010;14(8):1377–1382. doi: 10.1007/s10008-009-0959-2
18. Anufriev IE, Muratova EN, Valeev RG, et al. Nanoporous membranes based on aluminum oxide for homogenization of a liposomal solution. Vestnik NovSU. 2023;1(130):9–21. doi: 10.34680/2076-8052.2023.1(130).9-21
Review
For citations:
Nikiforov A.I., Anufriev I.E., Trushlyakova V.V., Valeev R.G., Korolev D.V. Comparison of post-processing methods for liposomal preparations using different techniques. Translational Medicine. 2025;12(6):562-575. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18705/2311-4495-2025-12-6-562-575
JATS XML





















