Available online on 15.10.2026 at http://jddtonline.info

Journal of Drug Delivery and Therapeutics

Open Access to Pharmaceutical and Medical Research

Copyright  © 2026 The  Author(s): This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NC 4.0 which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium for non-commercial use provided the original author and source are credited

Open Access  Full Text Article                                                                                               Review Article

Microencapsulated Beadlets: A Comprehensive Review

Bhav Saraswat ¹*, Jyoti Gupta ¹, Rambabu Sharma²

¹ Department of Pharmacy, IEC University, Baddi, Himachal Pradesh, India

² Department of Pharmacy, Himalayan Institute of Pharmacy, Kala-Amb, Himachal Pradesh, India

1. Introduction

The development of advanced pharmaceutical dosage forms has increasingly focused on improving the therapeutic performance of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) through controlled, predictable, and patient-oriented drug delivery. Conventional dosage forms, such as tablets and capsules, are often associated with limitations including fluctuations in plasma drug concentration, frequent dosing, poor patient compliance, rapid drug elimination, and difficulties in achieving site-specific or prolonged drug delivery. To overcome these limitations, modern formulation research has increasingly explored controlled-release and multiparticulate drug delivery systems capable of modifying the rate, duration, and site of drug release ^1-3.

Microencapsulation is an important pharmaceutical technology in which an active substance is surrounded, entrapped, embedded, or dispersed within a protective polymeric or lipid-based material. Depending on the structural design, the resulting particles may be classified as microcapsules, microspheres, microbeads, or other microparticulate systems. In microcapsules, the active material is generally surrounded by a distinct coating or shell, whereas in matrix-type microspheres or beadlets, the drug is distributed throughout the carrier matrix. The physicochemical properties of these systems can be tailored by selecting appropriate polymers, processing conditions, and particle architectures ^1,4,5.

Figure No.1 Microencapsulated beadlets: structure, preparation and application

Microencapsulated beadlets represent a particularly versatile class of multiparticulate delivery system as shwon in Figure No.1. These small, discrete, and usually spherical or near-spherical units can be designed to contain a drug-loaded core, a polymeric matrix, or multiple functional layers. The individual beadlets can subsequently be filled into hard gelatin capsules, compressed into multiple-unit pellet tablets, incorporated into sachets, or administered as sprinkle formulations. An important advantage of this approach is that different populations of beadlets can be manufactured separately and subsequently combined to produce a desired therapeutic release pattern. For example, immediate-release beadlets may be combined with prolonged-release beadlets to achieve a rapid onset of action followed by maintenance of the therapeutic drug concentration for an extended period ^2,6.

The growing interest in beadlet-based delivery systems is closely associated with the advantages of multiparticulate dosage forms. In contrast to single-unit systems, multiparticulate formulations distribute the administered dose among numerous small units. This approach provides considerable flexibility in formulation design and may reduce the impact of the failure of an individual delivery unit. Moreover, the physicochemical and functional properties of different beadlet populations can be modified independently. Drug release can therefore be tailored by controlling factors such as particle size, drug distribution, polymer type, polymer molecular weight, coating composition, coating thickness, porosity, and degree of cross-linking ^2,3,5.

Microencapsulated beadlets can be prepared using several pharmaceutical techniques, including solvent evaporation, solvent extraction, coacervation-phase separation, fluid-bed coating, extrusion-spheronization, ionotropic gelation, spray drying, spray congealing, melt-based techniques, electrospraying, and microfluidic methods. The selection of a suitable preparation method depends on the physicochemical characteristics of the drug, the nature of the encapsulating material, the intended particle size, the required drug-loading capacity, and the desired release profile. Among these techniques, solvent extraction/evaporation has been extensively investigated for polymeric microsphere production, whereas extrusion-spheronization and fluid-bed processing are widely applied in the manufacture of oral multiparticulate systems^7-9.

The selection of encapsulating materials plays a decisive role in determining the properties and performance of microencapsulated beadlets. Natural polymers, such as alginate, chitosan, gelatin, and pectin, are frequently employed because of their biocompatibility and biodegradability. Semi-synthetic and synthetic polymers, including cellulose derivatives, ethylcellulose, polymethacrylates, and poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid), offer greater flexibility in controlling mechanical properties and drug-release behavior. Hydrophilic polymers may promote swelling and diffusion-controlled release, whereas hydrophobic polymers can form diffusion barriers and prolong drug release. Biodegradable polymers may additionally provide release through gradual polymer degradation ^1,4,10.

The pharmaceutical applications of microencapsulated beadlets extend beyond simple sustained drug delivery. These systems may improve drug stability by protecting sensitive APIs from moisture, oxygen, light, gastric acidity, and enzymatic degradation. They can also mask unpleasant taste and odor, reduce gastric irritation, separate incompatible components, and provide delayed, enteric, pulsatile, or site-specific drug release. Furthermore, the small size and multiparticulate nature of beadlets make them particularly suitable for pediatric and geriatric dosage forms, as well as for personalized medicine approaches requiring flexible dose adjustment and the combination of different drug-release populations ^1,2,5.

Despite these advantages, the development of microencapsulated beadlets presents several technological challenges. Achieving uniform particle size, high drug-loading capacity, reproducible encapsulation efficiency, controlled porosity, uniform coating thickness, and consistent release behavior remains difficult. Scale-up from laboratory to industrial production can further introduce variability related to mixing, droplet formation, solvent removal, fluidization, and drying conditions. Consequently, a comprehensive understanding of the relationships among formulation variables, processing parameters, particle characteristics, and drug-release mechanisms is essential for the successful development of robust beadlet-based delivery systems ^7,11.

Recent advances in microencapsulation have introduced innovative approaches such as microfluidics, electrohydrodynamic atomization, continuous manufacturing, and advanced particle engineering. These technologies have the potential to improve particle uniformity, process reproducibility, drug entrapment, and the precision of drug-release control. In addition, the application of Quality by Design principles and advanced analytical techniques is expected to facilitate a more systematic understanding and optimization of critical material attributes and critical process parameters ^2,12.

2. Method of Preparation of micro encapsulated beadlets

Microencapsulated beadlets can be prepared by several techniques depending on the physicochemical properties of the drug, the nature of the encapsulating polymer, the desired particle size, drug loading, and intended release profile. The selection of a suitable preparation method is critical because it directly influences beadlet morphology, size distribution, encapsulation efficiency, drug release, and stability. The major methods used for the preparation of microencapsulated beadlets are described below.

2.1 Solvent Evaporation Method

The solvent evaporation method is one of the most commonly used techniques for preparing polymeric microencapsulated beadlets. In this method, the drug and polymer are dissolved or dispersed in a volatile organic solvent and subsequently emulsified in an immiscible external phase containing a suitable stabilizer or surfactant. Continuous agitation produces small droplets, and the organic solvent is gradually removed by evaporation. As the solvent is eliminated, the polymer precipitates or solidifies around or within the drug, resulting in the formation of solid microencapsulated beadlets.

The method can be performed as a single emulsion, such as oil-in-water or water-in-oil, or as a double-emulsion system, particularly for hydrophilic drugs. Important process variables include the drug-to-polymer ratio, polymer concentration, stirring speed, emulsifier concentration, solvent composition, phase volume, temperature, and solvent evaporation rate. This technique is particularly useful for preparing sustained-release beadlets using polymers such as ethylcellulose, Eudragit, poly(lactic acid), and poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) ^7,13,14.

2.2 Solvent Extraction Method

The solvent extraction method is closely related to solvent evaporation. In this technique, the organic solvent used to dissolve the polymer is removed by extraction into an external phase rather than by simple evaporation. The drug-polymer solution is emulsified, and the solvent diffuses from the droplets into the surrounding medium. Continuous removal of the solvent causes rapid polymer precipitation and hardening of the beadlets.

The method is particularly useful for polymers such as PLGA and other biodegradable polymers. It may offer better control of solvent removal and particle solidification. However, the choice of extraction medium, solvent miscibility, extraction rate, and temperature significantly affects the porosity, morphology, and drug-release characteristics of the resulting beadlets ^7,13.

2.3 Coacervation–Phase Separation

Coacervation-phase separation is an important technique for preparing reservoir-type microcapsules and microencapsulated beadlets. In this process, a polymer-rich phase, known as the coacervate, is separated from a polymer solution and deposited around the dispersed core material. Phase separation may be induced by changing the temperature, pH, solvent composition, ionic strength, or by adding a non-solvent or another incompatible polymer.

The general procedure involves dispersion of the drug in a polymer solution, induction of phase separation, deposition of the coacervate around the drug particles, and subsequent hardening of the polymeric wall. The resulting beadlets can provide effective protection and controlled drug release. Gelatin, ethylcellulose, and other suitable polymers are commonly employed in this technique ^15-17.

2.4 Ionotropic Gelation Method

Ionotropic gelation is a mild and simple technique commonly used for preparing microencapsulated beadlets from ionically cross-linkable polymers. Sodium alginate is one of the most frequently used polymers because it rapidly forms a gel network in the presence of multivalent cations, particularly calcium ions.

In a typical process, the drug is dispersed or dissolved in a sodium alginate solution. The resulting mixture is extruded dropwise through a syringe or nozzle into a calcium chloride solution. On contact with calcium ions, the alginate undergoes ionic cross-linking and forms calcium alginate beadlets. The beadlets are allowed to cure for a predetermined period, collected by filtration, washed, and dried.

Ionotropic gelation is especially suitable for heat-sensitive drugs and biological substances because it can be performed under mild conditions. The particle size and drug-release behavior can be controlled by changing the polymer concentration, calcium ion concentration, nozzle diameter, dropping distance, and curing time ^18-23.

2.5 Emulsion–Gelation Method

The emulsion-gelation technique combines emulsification and gelation to prepare microencapsulated beadlets. The polymeric aqueous phase containing the drug is emulsified in an oil phase to generate small droplets. Gelation or cross-linking is subsequently induced by the addition of an appropriate cross-linking agent.

This technique is useful for reducing particle size and improving the sphericity of gelled beadlets. The final properties depend on the stirring speed, emulsifier concentration, phase ratio, polymer concentration, and cross-linking conditions. Emulsion-gelation is commonly used for alginate-, chitosan-, and other hydrogel-based beadlets ^24,25.

2.6 Extrusion–Spheronization

Extrusion–spheronization is a well-established technique for producing spherical multiparticulate systems. Initially, the drug, polymer, and excipients are blended to obtain a uniform powder mixture. A suitable granulating liquid is added to form a plastic wet mass. The wet mass is then extruded through a die to form cylindrical extrudates. These extrudates are subsequently transferred to a spheronizer, where frictional and centrifugal forces transform them into spherical beadlets or pellets.

The major processing steps are:

Dry mixing → Wet massing → Extrusion → Spheronization → Drying → Screening/Coating

The characteristics of the final beadlets depend on the moisture content, rheological properties of the wet mass, extrusion pressure, die dimensions, spheronization speed, spheronization time, and drying conditions. The method is widely used for oral multiparticulate formulations and can produce beadlets with excellent sphericity and flow properties ^26-33.

2.7 Fluid-Bed Coating and Layering

Fluid-bed technology is extensively used for the production of drug-layered and coated beadlets. In this process, inert starter cores or previously prepared beadlets are fluidized in an upward stream of air. A drug solution, suspension, or polymeric coating solution is sprayed onto the moving particles while simultaneous drying takes place.

Drug-layered beadlets can be prepared by applying a drug-containing solution or suspension onto inert cores. A functional polymer coating may subsequently be applied to achieve sustained, delayed, or enteric release.

The process generally follows:

Inert core → Drug layering → Drying → Functional coating → Curing

Critical parameters include inlet air temperature, fluidization rate, spray rate, atomization pressure, nozzle position, and coating formulation. Fluid-bed coating is particularly suitable for large-scale manufacturing because it can provide uniform coating and continuous particle movement ^34-37.

2.8 Spray Drying

Spray drying is a rapid particle-engineering technique in which a solution, suspension, or emulsion containing the drug and polymer is atomized into a stream of heated air. The solvent evaporates rapidly, leaving behind dry microencapsulated particles.

The process involves:

Preparation of feed → Atomization → Solvent evaporation → Particle separation → Collection

Spray drying can produce fine particles with relatively uniform size and is suitable for heat-sensitive materials when appropriate processing conditions are selected. However, high inlet temperatures, low encapsulation efficiency for some drugs, particle aggregation, and powder loss can limit its application.

2.9 Spray Congealing

Spray congealing, also known as spray chilling, is a solvent-free technique used primarily for lipid-based microencapsulated beadlets. The drug is dispersed or dissolved in a molten lipid or wax. The molten mixture is atomized into a cold chamber, where the droplets rapidly solidify into spherical particles.

This method is useful for preparing sustained-release and taste-masked formulations. It is particularly advantageous because it avoids the use of organic solvents. Common carriers include hydrogenated vegetable oils, fatty acids, waxes, and other pharmaceutically acceptable lipids ^38-39.

2.10 Melt-Based Encapsulation

In melt-based encapsulation, a drug is incorporated into a molten polymeric or lipid carrier. The molten mass is subsequently converted into discrete particles through extrusion, atomization, or cooling. As the temperature decreases, the carrier solidifies and entraps the drug within its matrix.

This technique is particularly suitable for drugs that are stable at the processing temperature and can be effectively incorporated into thermoplastic or lipidic materials ⁴⁰.

2.11 Freeze Drying

Freeze drying can be employed for preparing porous microencapsulated systems, especially when the drug is sensitive to high temperatures. The formulation is first frozen, and the frozen solvent is subsequently removed by sublimation under reduced pressure.

Although freeze drying is beneficial for thermolabile materials, it is generally associated with high processing costs, long production times, and greater energy requirements⁴¹.

2.12 Electrospraying and Electrohydrodynamic Atomization

Electrospraying uses electrical forces to produce very small droplets from a polymer-drug solution. The droplets are generated under a high-voltage electric field and subsequently undergo solvent evaporation, producing micro- or nanosized particles.

The technique offers advantages such as improved control over particle size and morphology. It is particularly useful for preparing uniform microencapsulated systems; however, its large-scale industrial application remains challenging⁴².

2.13 Microfluidic Preparation

Microfluidic technology provides precise control over the formation of droplets and microencapsulated particles. Drug and polymer solutions are introduced into micro channels, where controlled flow conditions generate droplets with highly uniform dimensions. The droplets may subsequently be solidified by solvent evaporation, ionic gelation, polymerization, or other processes.

Microfluidics offers excellent control over particle size, morphology, and internal structure. It is particularly promising for the preparation of monodisperse core–shell beadlets and advanced personalized drug-delivery systems⁴³.

3. Evaluation parameters of micro encapsulted beadlets

The evaluation of microencapsulated beadlets is essential for establishing their physicochemical characteristics, encapsulation performance, structural integrity, drug-release behaviour, and stability. A systematic evaluation enables assessment of formulation reproducibility and helps identify the optimized formulation with desirable pharmaceutical characteristics ^44-46.

3.1 Appearance and organoleptic properties are generally evaluated as preliminary quality attributes. The prepared beadlets are visually examined for colour, odour, shape, surface appearance, uniformity, aggregation, and the presence of cracks or other visible defects. Uniform appearance generally indicates consistency of the manufacturing process, whereas changes in colour, odour, or surface characteristics during storage may indicate instability or degradation ⁴⁴.

3.2 Particle size and size distribution are important characteristics because beadlet size can influence surface area, drug loading, dissolution behaviour, release rate, flow properties, and content uniformity. Particle size may be determined by optical microscopy, sieve analysis, laser diffraction, or image-analysis techniques. A relatively narrow size distribution is generally desirable because it contributes to uniform drug-release behaviour and reproducible handling characteristics ^46-47.

3.3.Surface morphology and shape provide important information about the structural characteristics of the beadlets. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) is frequently employed to examine sphericity, surface smoothness, cracks, pores, dents, aggregation, and other morphological features. Smooth and intact beadlets generally indicate effective formation of the encapsulating matrix, whereas cracks and pores may facilitate penetration of the dissolution medium and accelerate drug diffusion ^46,48.

The percentage yield is determined to assess the efficiency of the beadlet-production process. It is calculated by comparing the actual weight of dried beadlets recovered after processing with the theoretical weight of the formulation components. A high percentage yield generally reflects lower material loss during preparation, washing, separation, and drying processes. However, percentage yield should always be interpreted together with drug content and encapsulation efficiency because a high process yield does not necessarily indicate efficient drug incorporation ^46,49.

3.4. Drug content is determined to establish the amount of drug present in a specified quantity of beadlets and to assess dose uniformity. A weighed quantity of beadlets is suitably dissolved or extracted using an appropriate solvent, followed by quantitative analysis using a validated analytical method such as UV-visible spectrophotometry or high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Uniform drug content is essential for ensuring dose accuracy and batch-to-batch reproducibility ^44-45.

3.5. Encapsulation efficiency (EE%) is one of the most important parameters for evaluating microencapsulated systems. It represents the percentage of the initially added drug that is successfully incorporated into the beadlet matrix. High encapsulation efficiency indicates effective entrapment of the drug within the polymeric or other encapsulating matrix and minimizes drug loss during processing ^46,48,50.

Encapsulation Efficiency (%)=

3.6. Drug loading (%) represents the amount of drug incorporated per unit weight of the final dried beadlets. It differs from encapsulation efficiency because it indicates the proportion of drug in the final formulation rather than the percentage of the initially added drug that was recovered. Adequate drug loading is particularly important when the formulation is intended to deliver a therapeutically effective dose using a relatively small quantity of carrier material [46,50]. The drug loading is calculate by the following formula.

Drug Loading (%)=

3.7. Moisture content or loss on drying is another important parameter because residual moisture can influence the physical stability, mechanical strength, flow characteristics, microbial quality, and drug-release properties of beadlets. Excessive moisture may promote aggregation, chemical degradation, or microbial proliferation, whereas excessive drying may result in brittle beadlets. Moisture may be determined using a moisture analyser, conventional drying method, or Karl Fischer titration, depending on the formulation ^44,45.

3.8.Swelling behaviour is particularly important for beadlets prepared using hydrophilic polymers such as sodium alginate, chitosan, pectin, carbopol, and other swellable materials. A known weight of dried beadlets is immersed in an appropriate medium and weighed at predetermined time intervals after removal of excess surface liquid. The swelling index provides information about water uptake, polymer hydration, and matrix expansion, all of which can influence drug diffusion and release [49,51].The swelling index is determine by using the following equation.

Swelling Index (%)=

where Ws is the weight of swollen beadlets and Wd is the initial dry weight of the beadlets.

The flow properties of dried beadlets are evaluated to determine their suitability for handling, blending, capsule filling, packaging, and other downstream processing operations. Bulk density, tapped density, angle of repose, Carr's compressibility index, and Hausner's ratio are commonly determined. Good flow properties contribute to uniform processing and dose distribution ^44-45.

3.9. Mechanical strength and friability indicate the ability of beadlets to withstand mechanical stresses encountered during collection, drying, transportation, handling, packaging, and administration. Excessively fragile beadlets may undergo fracture or surface erosion, resulting in drug loss and modification of the intended drug-release profile. Therefore, adequate mechanical integrity is particularly important for multiparticulate dosage forms ^46,49.

3.10. Zeta potential or surface charge may be determined when charged polymers or colloidal components are incorporated into the formulation. Surface charge provides information about electrostatic interactions and the tendency of particles or beadlets to aggregate. This parameter can therefore contribute to understanding the physical stability of formulations containing charged polymeric materials ⁵².

3.11.Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) is widely used to evaluate possible interactions between the drug and encapsulating materials. FTIR spectra of the pure drug, individual excipients, physical mixture, and optimized beadlets are compared. Retention of the characteristic functional-group peaks of the drug without major shifts or disappearance generally indicates the absence of significant chemical incompatibility. However, minor changes may arise from hydrogen bonding or other non-covalent interactions and should be interpreted carefully ⁵³.

3.12.Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) is used to investigate the thermal behaviour of the drug, polymer, physical mixture, and microencapsulated beadlets. Comparison of the characteristic melting endotherm of the pure drug with that of the formulation can provide information regarding drug crystallinity, molecular dispersion, and possible drug–polymer interactions. Changes in the intensity, position, or disappearance of thermal transitions should be interpreted in conjunction with complementary solid-state characterization techniques ⁵⁴.

3.13. X-ray diffraction (XRD) is employed to determine the crystalline or amorphous nature of the encapsulated drug. Characteristic diffraction peaks observed for the crystalline drug can be compared with those obtained from the optimized beadlets. Reduction or disappearance of characteristic peaks may indicate reduced crystallinity or transformation of the drug into an amorphous or molecularly dispersed state within the polymeric matrix ⁵⁵.

3.14. Porosity and internal structure may also be evaluated when the drug-release mechanism is strongly influenced by the architecture of the beadlet matrix. The presence and distribution of pores can affect penetration of the dissolution medium, swelling, diffusion pathways, and drug-release kinetics. SEM and related microscopic techniques can provide useful information regarding these structural characteristics ^46,48.

3.15. In-vitro drug-release studies represent one of the most important performance evaluations of microencapsulated beadlets. The study is performed using an appropriate dissolution or release medium under controlled temperature and agitation conditions. Samples are withdrawn at predetermined intervals and replaced with an equivalent volume of fresh medium. The amount of drug released is quantified using a suitable validated analytical method, and cumulative percentage drug release is plotted against time. The resulting release profile provides information about the ability of the beadlets to achieve immediate, delayed, sustained, or controlled drug release ^56,57.

The drug-release data are subsequently subjected to release kinetic modelling using mathematical models such as zero-order, first-order, Higuchi, and Korsmeyer–Peppas models. The zero-order model describes drug release at a relatively constant rate, whereas the first-order model relates the release rate to the amount of drug remaining in the formulation. The Higuchi model primarily describes diffusion-controlled drug release, while the Korsmeyer–Peppas model can provide information about the mechanism of drug transport based on the release exponent. The most appropriate model should be selected using suitable statistical criteria and consideration of the underlying release mechanism ^56-58.

4. Marketed preparation of micro encapsulated beadlets

Microencapsulated beadlets and related multiparticulate pellet systems are commercially used to protect unstable drugs, mask unpleasant taste, and provide delayed or controlled drug release. Proton-pump inhibitors are among the most common marketed examples because these drugs require protection from the acidic gastric environment. Omeprazole, lansoprazole, and esomeprazole delayed-release preparations contain pellets or related multiparticulate units that provide delayed release in the gastrointestinal tract ^59-61. The details are given in following Table No.1

Table No.1:List of marketed preparations

5. Future Prospects of Microencapsulated Beadlets

The future of microencapsulated beadlets is promising due to their potential to improve drug stability, bioavailability, controlled release, and targeted drug delivery. Future developments are expected to focus on smart and personalized drug-delivery systems, advanced biodegradable polymers, nanotechnology, and combination drug delivery. Improved manufacturing technologies may also enhance formulation reproducibility and large-scale production.

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest associated with the preparation, research, authorship, or publication of this article. There are no financial, personal, professional, or institutional relationships that could have influenced the content, interpretation, or conclusions presented in this review. The authors also confirm that no external commercial or financial support was received that could be perceived as influencing the work.

References

1. Singh MN, Hemant KSY, Ram M, Shivakumar HG. “Microencapsulation: a promising technique for controlled drug delivery” Res Pharm Sci., 2010;5(2):65-77.
2. Kállai-Szabó N, Farkas D, Lengyel M, Basa B, Fleck C, Antal I. “Microparticles and multi-unit systems for advanced drug delivery” European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2024;194:106704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejps.2024.106704 PMid:38228279
3. Bale S, Khurana A, Reddy ASS, Singh M, Godugu C. “Overview on therapeutic applications of microparticulate drug delivery systems” Crit Rev Ther Drug Carrier Syst., 2016;33(4):309-361. https://doi.org/10.1615/CritRevTherDrugCarrierSyst.2016015798 PMid:27910739
4. Dasan KP, Rekha C. “Polymer blend microspheres for controlled drug release: the techniques for preparation and characterization: a review article” Curr Drug Deliv., 2012;9(6):588-595. https://doi.org/10.2174/156720112803529783 PMid:22780912
5. Yan C, Kim SR. “Microencapsulation for pharmaceutical applications: a review” ACS Appl Bio Mater, 2024;7(2):692-710. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.3c00776 PMid:38320297
6. Munday DL. “Extrusion and spheronization in the development of oral controlled-release dosage forms” Pharm Sci Technol Today, 1999;2(4):160-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1461-5347(99)00136-4 PMid:10322373
7. Freitas S, Merkle HP, Gander B. “Microencapsulation by solvent extraction/evaporation: reviewing the state of the art of microsphere preparation process technology” J Control Release, 2005;102(2):313-332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2004.10.015 PMid:15653154
8. Yan C, Kim SR. “Microencapsulation for pharmaceutical applications: a review” ACS Appl Bio Mater, 2024;7(2):692-710. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.3c00776 PMid:38320297
9. Munday DL. “Extrusion and spheronization in the development of oral controlled-release dosage forms” Pharm Sci Technol Today, 1999;2(4):160-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1461-5347(99)00136-4 PMid:10322373
10. Ramazani F, Chen W, Van Nostrum CF, Storm G, Kiessling F, Lammers T, Hennink WE, Kok RJ. “Strategies for encapsulation of small hydrophilic and amphiphilic drugs in PLGA microspheres: state-of-the-art and challenges” International journal of pharmaceutics, 2016;499(1-2):358-367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2016.01.020 PMid:26795193
11. Freitas S, Merkle HP, Gander B. “Microencapsulation by solvent extraction/evaporation: reviewing the state of the art of microsphere preparation process technology” J Control Release, 2005;102(2):313-332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2004.10.015 PMid:15653154
12. Su W, Wang D, Yeboah S, Wang J, Xu C, Wang L. “Microencapsulation and characterization of controlled-release intestinal drugs: a critical review, Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE , 2026;27(4):321-342. https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.B2400617 PMid:42046868 PMCid:PMC13121888
13. Freitas S, Merkle HP, Gander B. “Microencapsulation by solvent extraction/evaporation: reviewing the state of the art of microsphere preparation process technology”. J Control Release, 2005;102(2):313-332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2004.10.015 PMid:15653154
14. Li M, Rouaud O, Poncelet D. “Microencapsulation by solvent evaporation: state of the art for process engineering approaches” Int J Pharm, 2008;363(1-2):26-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2008.07.018 PMid:18706988
15. Lu Y, Park K. “Microencapsulation: methods and pharmaceutical applications. in: J. Swarbrick (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Pharmaceutical Science and Technology, 2012;1:1-3.
16. Jyothi NVN, Prasanna PM, Sakarkar SN, Prabha KS, Ramaiah PS, Srawan GY. “Microencapsulation techniques, factors influencing encapsulation efficiency” J Microencapsul, 2010;27(3):187-197. https://doi.org/10.3109/02652040903131301 PMid:20406093
17. Gouin S. “Microencapsulation: industrial appraisal of existing technologies and trends” Trends Food Sci Technol, 2004;15:330-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2003.10.005
18. George M, Abraham TE. Polyionic hydrocolloids for the intestinal delivery of protein drugs, J Control Release, 2006;114:1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2006.04.017 PMid:16828914
19. Anal AK, Stevens WF. “Chitosan-alginate multilayer beads for controlled release of protein” Int J Pharm. 2005;290:45-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2004.11.015 PMid:15664129
20. Hari PR, Chandy T, Sharma CP. “Chitosan/calcium-alginate beads for oral delivery of insulin” J Appl Polym Sci. 1996;59:1795-1801. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4628(19960314)59:11<1795::AID-APP16>3.0.CO;2-T
21. Nussinovitch A. Beads as drug carriers. In Polymer macro-and micro-gel beads: fundamentals and applications 2010 Aug 17 (pp. 191-230). New York, NY: Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6618-6_8
22. Gombotz WR, Wee SF. “Protein release from alginate matrices” Adv Drug Deliv Rev., 1998;31:267-285. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-409X(97)00124-5 PMid:10837629
23. Smidsrød O, Skjåk-Bræk G. “Alginate as immobilization matrix for cells” Trends Biotechnol., 1990;8:71-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-7799(90)90139-O PMid:1366500
24. Freitas S, Merkle HP, Gander B. “Microencapsulation by solvent extraction/evaporation”: reviewing the state of the art of microsphere preparation process technology. J Control Release., 2005;102(2):313-332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2004.10.015 PMid:15653154
25. Li M, Rouaud O, Poncelet D. “Microencapsulation by solvent evaporation: state of the art for process engineering approaches, Int J Pharm. 2008;363(1-2):26-39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2008.07.018 PMid:18706988
26. Vervaet C, Baert L, Remon JP. “Extrusion-spheronisation: a literature review” Int J Pharm, 1995;116:131-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5173(94)00311-R
27. Dukić-Ott A, Thommes M, Remon JP, Kleinebudde P, Vervaet C. “Production of pellets via extrusion-spheronisation without incorporation of microcrystalline cellulose: a critical review” Eur J Pharm Biopharm. 2009;71(1):38-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpb.2008.08.005 PMid:18771727
28. Muley S, Nandgude T, Poddar S. “Extrusion-spheronization a promising pelletization technique: In-depth review” Asian journal of pharmaceutical sciences. 2016 1;11(6):684-699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajps.2016.08.001
29. Ghai D. “Extrusion and spheronization in the development of oral controlled-release dosage forms” Pharm Sci Technol Today, 1999;2(4):160-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1461-5347(99)00136-4 PMid:10322373
30. Kleinebudde P. “The crystallite-gel model for microcrystalline cellulose in extrusion-spheronization” Pharm Res. 1997;14:804-809. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012166809583 PMid:9210201
31. Fielden KE, Newton JM, O’Brien P, Rowe RC. “Thermal studies on the interaction between water and microcrystalline cellulose”. J Pharm Pharmacol., 1988;40:674-678. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-7158.1988.tb06993.x PMid:2907531
32. Wan LSC, Heng PWS, Liew CV. “Spheronization conditions on spheroid shape and size” Int J Pharm. 1993;96:59-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5173(93)90212-X
33. Vertommen J, Kinget R. “The influence of five selected processing variables on pellet distribution, surface area, porosity and hardness” Int J Pharm., 1997;153:135-145.
34. Mehta AM. Fluid bed processing: principles and applications. Pharm Technol. 2003;27:62-76.
35. Porter SC. “Fluid-bed processing: coating and granulation” Pharm Technol., 2002;26:44-58.
36. Jones DM. Film coating of multiparticulate systems. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2001;27:571-579.
37. Felton LA. “Film coating of oral solid dosage forms” AAPS PharmSciTech. 2013;14:1213-1223.
38. Ghebre-Sellassie I. “Pellets: a general overview” In: Ghebre-Sellassie I, ed. Pharmaceutical Pelletization Technology New York: Marcel Dekker; 1989.
39. Rowe RC. “The adhesion of film coatings to tablet surfaces” J Pharm Pharmacol. 1980;32:501-505. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-7158.1980.tb12893.x PMid:6103940
40. Bodmeier R, Paeratakul O. “The drug release from microparticles prepared by a modified solvent evaporation method” J Microencapsul. 1990;7(4):527-537.
41. Wada R, Hyon SH, Ikada Y.” Preparation of biodegradable microspheres” J Pharm Sci. 1991;80:1117-1122.
42. O’Donnell PB, McGinity JW. “Preparation of microspheres by the solvent evaporation technique” Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 1997;28:25-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-409X(97)00049-5 PMid:10837563
43. Arshady R. “Preparation of biodegradable microspheres and microcapsules” J Control Release. 1991;17:1-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-3659(91)90126-X
44. Aulton ME, Taylor KMG. Aulton’s pharmaceutics: the design and manufacture of medicines. 6^th ed. London: Elsevier; 2022.
45. Allen LV Jr. Ansel’s pharmaceutical dosage forms and drug delivery systems. 11^th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2020.
46. Benita S, editor. Microencapsulation: methods and industrial applications. 2^nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2006.
47. Nandiyanto ABD, Okuyama K. “Progress in developing a simple and rapid method for the production of controlled morphology particles” Adv Powder Technol. 2011;22(1):1-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apt.2010.09.011
48. Jyothi NVN, Prasanna PM, Sakarkar SN, Prabha KS, Ramaiah PS, Srawan GY. “Microencapsulation techniques, factors influencing encapsulation efficiency” J Microencapsul. 2010;27(3):187-197. https://doi.org/10.3109/02652040903131301 PMid:20406093
49. Soppimath KS, Kulkarni AR, Aminabhavi TM. “Development of hollow microspheres as floating controlled-release systems for cardiovascular drugs: preparation and release characteristics” Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2001;27(6):507-515. https://doi.org/10.1081/DDC-100105175 PMid:11548857
50. Freiberg S, Zhu XX. Polymer microspheres for controlled drug release. Int J Pharm. 2004;282(1-2):1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2004.04.013 PMid:15336378
51. George M, Abraham TE. “Polyionic hydrocolloids for the intestinal delivery of protein drugs: alginate and chitosan-a review” J Control Release. 2006;114(1):1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2006.04.017 PMid:16828914
52. Müller RH, Jacobs C, Kayser O. “Nanosuspensions as particulate drug formulations in therapy. Rationale for development and what we can expect for the future” Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2001;47(1):3-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-409X(00)00118-6 PMid:11251242
53. Stuart B. Infrared spectroscopy: fundamentals and applications. Chichester: Wiley; 2004. https://doi.org/10.1002/0470011149
54. Craig DQM, Reading M, editors. Thermal analysis of pharmaceuticals. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2007. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420014891
55. Yu L. “Amorphous pharmaceutical solids: preparation, characterization and stabilization” Adv Drug Deliv Rev. 2001;48(1):27-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-409X(01)00098-9 PMid:11325475
56. Siepmann J, Peppas NA. “Higuchi equation: derivation, applications, use and misuse” Int J Pharm. 2011;418(1):6-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2011.03.051 PMid:21458553
57. Korsmeyer RW, Gurny R, Doelker E, Buri P, Peppas NA. “Mechanisms of solute release from porous hydrophilic polymers” Int J Pharm. 1983;15(1):25-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5173(83)90064-9
58. International Council for Harmonisation. ICH harmonised tripartite guideline Q1A(R2): stability testing of new drug substances and products. Geneva: ICH; 2003.
59. Omeprazole delayed-release capsules;2009. Available at: https://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/drugInfo.cfm?setid=b43f6b44-9de3-4efb-a467-487aee28f6a0.Accessed Augest 25,2026.
60. Lansoprazoledelayed-releasecapsules;2025.Available at: https://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/drugInfo.cfm?setid=9e246e79-2737-4cbb-ad5d-4e76893da3be.Accessed Augest 25,2026.
61. Esomeprazole magnesium delayed-release capsules;2025.Available at: https://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/lookup.cfm?setid=e04e7c84-59c8-4a1d-8dfc-d72588b97b59 Bethesda (MD): National Library of Medicine; Accessed Augest 25,2026.
62. Pilbrant Å, Cederberg C., “Development of an oral formulation of omeprazole” Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl. 1985;108:113-20. https://doi.org/10.3109/00365528509095824 PMid:3858973
63. Vervaet C, Baert L, Remon JP, “Extrusion-spheronisation: a literature review” Int J Pharm. 1995;116(2):131-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-5173(94)00311-R
64. Layer P, Keller J, “Pancreatic enzymes: secretion and luminal nutrient digestion in health and disease” J Clin Gastroenterol” 1999;28(1):3-10. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004836-199901000-00002 PMid:9916657
65. Ghebre-Sellassie I, editor. Pharmaceutical pelletization technology. New York: Marcel Dekker; 1989.
66. Ghebre-Sellassie I, Knoch A. Pelletization techniques. In: Ghebre-Sellassie I, editor. Pharmaceutical pelletization technology. New York: Marcel Dekker; 1989.
67. Vyas SP, Khar RK. Controlled drug delivery: concepts and advances. New Delhi: Vallabh Prakashan; 2012.
68. Jyothi NVN, Prasanna PM, Sakarkar SN, Prabha KS, Ramaiah PS, Srawan GY., “Microencapsulation techniques, factors influencing encapsulation efficiency” J Microencapsul. 2010;27(3):187-97. https://doi.org/10.3109/02652040903131301 PMid:20406093