4.7 Article

Spherical Crystallization of Glycine from Monodisperse Microfluidic Emulsions

期刊

CRYSTAL GROWTH & DESIGN
卷 12, 期 8, 页码 3977-3982

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/cg300413s

关键词

-

资金

  1. GSK-EDB Fund for Sustainable Manufacturing in Singapore
  2. Chemical and Pharmaceutical Engineering Programme of the Singapore-MIT Alliance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Emulsion-based crystallization to produce spherical crystalline agglomerates (SAs) is an attractive route to control crystal size during downstream processing of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs). However, conventional methods of emulsification in stirred vessels pose several problems that limit the utility of emulsion-based crystallization. In this paper, we use capillary microfluidics to generate monodisperse water-in-oil emulsions. Capillary microfluidics, in conjunction with evaporative crystallization on a flat heated surface, enables controllable production of uniformly sized SAs of glycine in the 35-150 mu m size range. We report detailed characterization of particle size, size distribution, structure, and polymorphic form. Further, online high-speed stereomicroscopic observations reveal several clearly demarcated stages in the dynamics of glycine crystallization from emulsion droplets. Rapid droplet shrinkage is followed by crystal nucleation within individual droplets. Once a nucleus is formed within a droplet, crystal growth is very rapid (<0.1 s) and occurs linearly along radially advancing fronts at speeds of up to 1 mm/s, similar to spherulitic crystal growth from impure melts. The spherulitic aggregate thus formed ages to yield the final SA morphology. Overall crystallization times are on the order of minutes, as compared to hours in conventional batch processes. We discuss these phenomena and their implications for the development of more generalized processes applicable to a variety of drug molecules. This work paves the way for microfluidics-enabled continuous spherical crystallization processes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据