Microneedles and Their Application in Transdermal Delivery of Antihypertensive Drugs—A Review

1. Introduction

Hypertension (HTN) is defined as a pathological disorder that is characterized by elevated blood pressure (BP), i.e., the systolic around 140–150 or above [1]. The World Health Organization (WHO) has identified HTN as one of the leading causes of mortality and morbidity globally, accounting for nearly 9 million deaths yearly [2]. Substantial scientific studies have linked high blood pressure (BP) to various disorders, such as cardiovascular disorders and heart failure [3]. Hypertension is also considered a significant risk factor for the development of angina pectoris, chronic kidney disease (CKD), diabetes miletus (DM), and atrial fibrillation [4,5]. Hypertension and diabetes are considered to often coexist together. The risk of developing diabetes, mostly type 2, is higher in patients with hypertension than in healthy people. Following that, several clinical trials and epidemiological studies revealed a link between antihypertensive drugs (e.g., thiazide diuretics or beta-blockers) and the development of diabetes (type 2). Some reported studies have found that beta-blockers, in particular, appear to enhance the incidence of diabetes in hypertensive patients [6]. Apart from this, the elevated risk linked to high BP can mostly be considerably reduced with antihypertensive therapy, which reduces both associated target organ damage and BP [7,8]. The first-line treatment of HTN could be chosen from the following classes: angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE inhibitors), calcium channel blockers (CCBs), and thiazide-type diuretics. Each antihypertensive class lowers the risk of cardiovascular events [9]. It is challenging for hypertensive patients to follow their therapeutic regimens using traditional dosage forms, including tablets, capsules, and injections [10]. The pediatric population suffering from hypertension has trouble swallowing medications and is allergic to needles [5]. Most antihypertensive drugs are given in the form of tablets; nevertheless, tablets have several disadvantages, including gastrointestinal discomfort, drug degradation in the stomach, irregular absorption, and pre-systemic drug metabolism, eventually leading to lower bioavailability [10,11]. Such issues can be solved to some extent by administering antihypertensive drugs via transdermal microneedle (MN)-based drug delivery systems [12]. The restrictions of the oral and injectable routes are bypassed with the MN-based transdermal drug delivery system, as the needles are non-invasive, low-cost, and easy to use [13,14,15,16]. They are micron-sized needles that are less than 1000 µm in size and can penetrate the principal barriers of the skin that inhibit drug molecules’ transport through the stratum corneum without causing pain (Figure 1) [15,17]. MN systems can provide precise drug localization with reduced dosing frequency and improve patient compliance through the convenience of administration and better biodistribution with efficacy [18]. A significant problem for the therapeutic application of antihypertensive medications is their limited aqueous solubility.

Likewise, few hypertensive drugs (e.g., valsartan, benidpine, and felodipine) belong to the Biopharmaceutical Classification System (BCS) class II; they possess poor aqueous solubility and high drug permeability. The goal is to improve the solubility of poorly aqueous-soluble drugs to increase their bioavailability [19]. Drugs with low water solubility are formulated in non-aqueous carriers such as lipid-based systems and delivered through MNs directly into the skin. This approach encapsulates and solubilizes poorly soluble drugs. MNs allow drugs to bypass the stratum corneum to enable direct access to the underlying tissue and bypass the need for drug solubility in water [20]. High drug permeability refers to the ability of the drug to pass through biological barriers, like tissues or cell membranes, in order to reach its targeted site of action [21]. For antihypertensive drugs to exhibit higher drug absorption, both their solubility and permeability must be higher. In the case of antihypertensive drugs, higher permeability is desirable as it allows for efficient absorption and distribution throughout the body to exert their therapeutic effect [22]. Recently, numerous cutting-edge research studies on microneedles reported that they could significantly increase transdermal drug delivery across the human skin safely [23,24,25]. This review exclusively focuses on the emerging field of MN-mediated delivery of antihypertensive drugs. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of recent advancements in utilizing MN technology for the efficient administration of antihypertensive drugs.

In addition, we also discuss other factors, such as the potential benefits, limitations, and prospects of MN-based delivery of antihypertensive drugs compared to the traditional route. We emphasize the existing literature on MNs targeting hypertension and their types involving manufacturing. The present manuscript is the first to cover hypertension and MNs. It will benefit the researchers and clinicians working on MNs and hypertension.

2. Overview of Hypertension

2.1. Hypertension and Different Treatment Strategies for Hypertension

Hypertension, often known as arterial hypertension, is a chronic medical disorder characterized by abnormally elevated pressure in the arteries. The systolic and diastolic measurements of blood pressure refer to either the contraction of the heart muscle, called systole, or the relaxation of the heart muscle, named diastole [26,27]. According to the American College of Cardiology (ACA) and the American Heart Association (AHA), a normal blood pressure range is 100–139 mmHg systolic and 60–89 mmHg diastolic [28]. When the blood pressure is regularly at or higher than 140/90 mmHg, hypertension is presumably present [28,29]. Hypertension is a significant risk factor for disorders like renal disease and myocardial infarction (MI) [30]. Blood pressure (BP) levels directly impact the likelihood of developing disorders like coronary artery disease and stroke [31]. Hypertension treatment has been designated a global health priority [32,33]. Primary (essential) hypertension and secondary hypertension are two types of hypertension. Primary (essential) or idiopathic hypertension refers to hypertension with no secondary causes, such as renal failure, monogenic forms, and renovascular disease, which accounts for nearly 95% of cases globally [27]. Essential hypertension is a heterogeneous condition, with various people experiencing different causes of high blood pressure, whether environmental or genetic. Secondary hypertension is caused by multiple factors, including renal, vascular, and endocrine [26]. Although lifestyle interventions can help manage blood pressure and reduce health issues, therapy is typically required for individuals with insufficient dietary and lifestyle interventions [26,34]. The most important and extensively used antihypertensives are thiazide diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, calcium channel blockers (CCBs), β-blockers, and angiotensin II receptor antagonists (ARBs) (Figure 2). Individual patient characteristics influence antihypertensive drug selection. Risk factors like advanced age and arrhythmia linked to elevated BP must all be taken into account, while patient tolerance, comorbidity, and drug interactions all play a role in the selection of antihypertensive drugs [31].

2.2. Etiology and Risk Factors of Hypertension

Blood pressure elevations have been associated with various etiological factors as potential causes that can lead to the onset of hypertension [35,36,37]. Etiological factors, e.g., low intake of sodium and potassium, high sodium intake, low intake of fruits and vegetables, being overweight, lack of physical activity, and tobacco and alcohol use, can lead to hypertension. Metabolic disorders such as hyperinsulinemia and insulin resistance are also etiological factors that lead to hypertension [38].

2.3. Problems Concerning Oral Drug Administration of Antihypertensive Drugs

The most common way to achieve a systemic effect is through the oral administration of drugs. Compared to other administration methods, drug delivery through the oral route is the most desired and extensively used method, with painless administration, patient adherence, and so on [39]. Nonetheless, problems related to the physical properties of active substances, such as limited water solubility, instability, and low permeability, all lead to irregular and low oral bioavailability, making oral administration difficult [40]. Extreme pH, delayed attainment of pharmacodynamic effect, poor intestinal permeability, unpredictable bioavailability, sustained toxicity, dosing inflexibility, dose dumping, and CYP 450-mediated enzymatic metabolism are all factors that prevent the drug from being administered orally [41]. The aqueous solubility of an orally taken drug determines how well it dissolves in the gastrointestinal tract. Hydrophobic oral medications have poor absorption, dosage proportionality, and unwanted side effects [42].

Oral formulations (e.g., tablets) are usually the primary choice for drug administration because of their comparative ease of preparation and use [43]. There are numerous drugs available that can treat hypertension in traditional dosage forms. Several studies have been published on the oral administration of antihypertensive drugs [44,45,46]. The traditional oral dosage of antihypertensive drugs typically involves immediate-release formulations, which often require multiple doses per day to maintain therapeutic drug levels, leading to fluctuations in blood pressure and decreased patient compliance. Compared to traditional oral administration, the controlled release of oral antihypertensive drugs can be administered once or twice daily with comparable therapeutic efficacy and fewer adverse reactions than standard formulations. Several antihypertensive drugs have been developed as controlled-release formulations, including calcium channel blockers, β-blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. These controlled-release formulations are typically designed to be taken less frequently, making it easier for patients to comply with their therapeutic regimen. Controlled-release formulations of calcium channel blockers, such as diltiazem, nifedipine, and verapamil, provide a sustained drug release over 24 h, reducing the dosing frequency and minimizing side effects [47]. A controlled-release tablet of β-blockers, e.g., propranolol hydrochloride, was prepared to reduce dosing frequency and improve patient compliance [48,49]. Controlled-release formulations of ACE inhibitors, such as perindopril, were also formulated to provide a sustained release of the drug over 24 h [50].

A summarized list of antihypertensive drugs showing physicochemical and metabolic profiles is shown in Table 1. The treatment algorithm for hypertensive patients is shown in Figure 3.

3. Overview and Classification of Microneedles

MNs are medical devices with a single or a group of needles with a diameter of a few micrometers that transport drug components to the outermost layers of the skin [77,78]. For transdermal drug delivery, a needle with a length of up to 1000 µm is long enough to pass through the stratum corneum and release the drug into the dermis [79,80]. MNs benefit from reducing tension or anxiety caused by needle phobia, vasovagal reactions, and pain experienced when a traditional needle is used [81,82]. MNs are fabricated from various materials, e.g., silicon, metal, and glass. Depending on the manufacturing procedure, the needles’ shapes might range from cones to square pyramids [83]. MNs must be powerful enough to pierce the skin without producing blood [84]. To release the entrapped pharmaceutical cargo and prevent sharp waste, the MNs should preferably decompose in the human skin [85]. Due to their unique characteristics and avoidance of hazardous waste sharps, MNs have advantages over oral and other drug delivery methods [86,87]. Pediatrics and geriatrics who have trouble swallowing would benefit from this system [86]. Depending on the desired drug delivery mechanism, these can be categorized into different types: silicon MNs, dissolving MNs, solid MNs, polymer MNs, glass MNs, hydrogel-forming MNs, ceramic MNs, metal MNs, coated MNs, sugar MNs, and hollow MNs [88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95] (Table 2) (Figure 4 and Figure 5). During the early development stage, most of the MNs were made of silicon [96]. Some metals, including titanium, stainless steel, nickel, and others, have mechanical qualities that are well integrated, such as high strength and toughness, which can protect MNs against mechanical failure. Furthermore, metal MNs can be produced at a lower cost than silicon MNs. Metal MNs will also generate biohazardous tip waste [97]. The most promising materials for MN manufacturing are polymers. They can be adaptable, easily accessible, cost-effective, biocompatible, and have sophisticated features, such as built-in controlled release mechanisms [94]. Polymers have higher toughness than silicon-like brittle materials, allowing polymer MNs to prevent brittle breakage upon insertion into the skin. Polymer MNs rarely cause severe side effects because most polymers are biocompatible. It is worth noting that, because most polymers have a low melting temperature, several manufacturing techniques, like micromolding, are suitable for the low-cost mass production of MNs. As a result, polymers are gaining popularity and are seen as potential materials for MN manufacturing [97]. MN technology has steadily advanced for the past four decades. MNs can transfer vaccines, insulin, and other pharmaceutical dosage forms via the skin, according to numerous preclinical investigations and a small number of clinical trials [98].

4. Fabrication and Current Status of Microneedles

4.1. Microneedle Design and Fabrication

When designing MNs for skin penetration, there are a few important factors to consider: (a) physical characteristics, such as hollow, solid, side-opened, beveled, and conical tipped; (b) material choice; (c) geometric characteristics, such as diameter, length, shape, and tip size; (d) array layout; (e) fabrication feasibility [113]. Some MN fabrication technologies include wet chemical etching, injection molding, laser drilling, reactive ion etching, hot embossing, drawing lithography, and lithography with electroforming (Table 3) (Figure 6). To date, silicon deep reactive ion etching (DRIE), micromolding, and photolithography are the most extensively used production techniques for the fabrication of microneedles [113,114]. Microelectromechanical systems are commonly used to fabricate microneedles. The basic procedure for making MNs can be broken down into three steps: (a) deposition, making a deposit, (b) patterning, creating patterns, and (c) etching or engraving [115]. There are various ways to manufacture microneedle devices, including surface/bulk micromachining, injection molding, reactive ion etching, isotropic chemical etching, and so on [115].

Table 3. Overview of key microneedle fabrication.

Figure 6. Various casting and molding techniques are used for the preparation of MNs ((Figure reproduced with modification (Modified form Bhatnagar and group, 2019 [119]).

Figure 6. Various casting and molding techniques are used for the preparation of MNs ((Figure reproduced with modification (Modified form Bhatnagar and group, 2019 [119]).

4.2. Diverse Application of MNs in Advanced Drug Delivery

When MNs are designed to fit the qualities of drugs, such as their polarity and pharmacological characteristics, they are regarded as an appropriate method for delivering various drug moieties via continuous transdermal delivery. Typically, drugs are inserted into the microneedle matrix or deposited onto the surface of the microneedle tips. The drugs can sometimes be preloaded into nanoparticles encased in the microneedle matrix to regulate the medication release profile [123]. The latest advancements in drug delivery via MNs include small molecule delivery, insulin delivery, cosmeceuticals, and cancer treatment [124]. Drugs possessing molecular weights below 500 Da can penetrate the skin passively, but the penetrated amounts are insufficient to produce therapeutically effective doses. As a result, polymeric MNs have been used to improve the transdermal delivery of drugs with small molecular sizes [122,125].

4.3. Mechanism, Pharmacokinetics, and Insertion Behavior of MNs

Hundreds of MNs, each less than 1 mm long, are arranged in an MN array to deliver medication to the skin. An MN patch is developed when an MN array is connected to an adhesive backing to help its adhesion to the skin [126]. The drug is deposited into the dermis layer of the skin, where it can easily reach its intended target site as part of the drug delivery process, resulting in temporary mechanical disruption of the skin (Figure 9). Additionally, MNs provide microscale drug delivery channels while bypassing still-functioning blood vessels and nerve terminals in the epidermis and dermis. As a result, drug delivery efficiency is improved, and greater doses and medicines with larger molecular sizes can be administered without difficulty [127]. For example, biodegradable polymers have been utilized to fabricate polymeric MN-containing drugs inside a polymer matrix. These MNs puncture the skin; the polymers disintegrate, releasing the medications into the bloodstream and causing a therapeutic reaction at the site of action [79].

Following MN application, pharmacokinetics explains how the body reacts to a therapeutic moiety and how it flows through, out of, and into the body (including metabolic changes, absorption, and distribution mechanisms) [124]. The pharmacokinetic profile of MNs can be influenced by several factors, such as the rate at which the polymer matrix dissolves, the total drug dose injected into the MN, and the enzymatic degradation of the drug into the skin [97]. Lee’s research team employed a dissolving polymeric MN composed of carboxymethylcellulose and gelatin to deliver insulin to diabetic rats. They found that the pharmacokinetic parameter area under the curve (AUC) value increased following the MN application. Polymeric MNs for insulin administration showed adequate pharmacokinetics compared to typical hypodermic injections [128]. These findings suggest that MNs could be extremely effective transdermal drug delivery systems. MNs offer much potential for the quick, painless, and convenient administration of medications by fulfilling pharmacokinetic requirements.

The insertion behavior of MNs into the skin can also be influenced by the structure and mechanical properties of the skin, as determined by Kong and Wu [129]. Factors, such as the effects of the MN length on effective drug delivery and associated pain, must be considered while designing MNs [130]. The lowest insertion force is always expected because it naturally signifies less pain and invasiveness [131].

4.4. Advantages of MNs for Drug Delivery, Patient Monitoring, Diagnostics, and Vaccine Delivery

MNs have potential advantages over conventional hypodermic needles for drug and vaccine delivery. MNs are designed with unique dimensions to avoid stimulating nerves and causing patient discomfort. MNs have the potential to be administered without clinical expertise, as they are in the form of affordable disposable patches to improve the pharmacokinetic profile of therapeutic component delivery. For example, disposable MN patches could reduce the transmission of HIV by encouraging the self-administration of tests and treatments [113]. Some other advantages of MN-based drug delivery are: faster healing at the injection site than a hypodermic needle, decreased microbial penetration, the MN punctures only the epidermis, specific skin areas can be targeted for desired drug delivery, dose reduction, and the drug delivery rate can be controlled more effectively by this drug delivery system [132].

Nowadays, MNs have been employed as a diagnostic aid in managing diseases. The traditional methods for blood withdrawal are characterized by discomfort and fear among patients; this can be avoided by employing MNs through their painless biofluid withdrawal method. With their ease of usage, MNs represent a unique tool for detecting a wide range of biomarkers from skin interstitial fluid, including small molecule metabolites, nucleic acids, proteins, and even cells. Recent studies revealed the status of diseases (cancer, diabetes, arthritis, etc.) by analyzing blood and tissue using hollow MNs or quantum dots [133].

MNs have been widely investigated in the past years to enhance transdermal drug delivery. Recently, researchers have realized the potential of MNs for enhancing patient monitoring. Several methods of patient monitoring with MNs have been proposed, including using solid arrays for pretreatment before fluid collection, hollow microneedle arrays for fluid collection and subsequent off-site analysis, and integrated options, eliminating the need for fluid removal. Regardless of the strategy, the MN device must successfully and repeatedly penetrate without fracture and provide precise measurements of the target analytes to be a useful alternative to existing practices. When looking into MN platforms for minimally invasive patient monitoring, there are many factors to consider, and many different strategies have been taken into account [134].

The use of MNs in vaccination is particularly appealing since it provides the anticipated benefits of simplifying vaccine administration, enhancing patient compliance, and permitting vaccine targeting to the skin. It is well recognized that administering vaccines through the skin has immunologic benefits over doing so by intramuscular injection. Still, there have not been any straightforward, dependable techniques for doing so. This constraint can be overcome by using MNs, including hollow MNs for intradermal injection and solid MN patches. The use of MNs for vaccine delivery has received the most research attention due to these opportunities [85].

There are different routes for drug delivery, which include oral, intravenous, transdermal patches, etc. The oral route is the most traditional and convenient for patients, with acceptable ease of administration but limited bioavailability. The oral route adversely affects long-term medications because it affects crucial organs, including the liver and kidneys [100]. However, a transdermal patch requires the drug to cross the stratum corneum barrier, thus showing less bioavailability. The transdermal patch can improve drug permeation by adding a permeation enhancer, but up to a minimal extent. The hypodermic needle goes deep into the dermis, where pain receptors are present. As a result, it can deliver 90–100% of the loaded drug, but because it is painful, it results in poor patient compliance. MNs bypass the stratum corneum barrier and deliver the drug directly into the epidermis and dermis layers, delivering 100% of the loaded drug without causing pain [79].

4.5. MN-Mediated Antihypertensive Agents and Some Reported Nanoparticle-Based Delivery Systems

The link between cardiovascular disease and high blood pressure is widely established in the scientific literature. Hypertension can lead to kidney failure and coronary artery disease if left untreated. Hypertension is still a life-threatening medical issue, despite recent breakthroughs in hypertension research and therapies [1]. As a result, it is imperative to develop and test innovative hypertensive medicines to enhance patients’ long-term clinical care and results. Several hypertension animal models have been developed recently to facilitate in vivo testing of both treatment methods and medication efficacy [135].

Recently, MNs have been used as an alternative drug delivery system to deliver antihypertensive drugs across the skin barrier painlessly. MN-based drug delivery reduces the risk of adverse effects associated with oral antihypertensive medications. Additionally, MNs can be used to deliver sustained-release formulations of antihypertensive drugs, which can help improve patient compliance and reduce dosing frequency. Overall, MN-based drug delivery of antihypertensive drugs has the potential to be a safe and effective treatment option for patients with hypertension. Recently, much research has been going on to develop and optimize the delivery system for different antihypertensive drugs [24,136]. Some research utilizing MN-based drug delivery of antihypertensive drugs is discussed here.

An antihypertensive dissolving MN was developed utilizing concurrent medicine, e.g., sodium nitroprusside (SNP) in combination with sodium thiosulfate (ST). Dissolvable MNs were fabricated by centrifugal casting using SNPs and ST. SNPs were stably packaged into microneedles and rapidly delivered into the systemic circulation using this approach. Antihypertensive microneedle treatment (aH-MN) reduced blood pressure quickly and significantly. It met the clinical standards for hypertensive emergency blood pressure treatment. Concurrent delivery of ST successfully decreased the negative effects (e.g., organ damage) caused by SNP ingestion. This research demonstrated an effective and user-friendly biodegradable patch for the controllable delivery of drugs in antihypertensive therapy [23,137]. Ahad et al. formulated eprosartan mesylate-loaded transferosome gel to study skin permeation. The pharmacodynamic study showed better management of hypertension after the application of transferosome gel as compared to an oral formulation. An MN roller, e.g., a dermaroller, was utilized on rats’ skin to increase the permeation enhancement of the drug. The transdermal flux of the eprosartan mesylate from transferosome gel across rat skin improved when pretreated with an MN [138]. Table 4 summarizes the published research data in which hypertensive drugs are formulated using an MN-based approach.

4.6. MNs for the Transdermal Delivery of Hypertensive Drugs: Critical Attributes and Upcoming Challenges

Several drugs are available in conventional dosage forms to treat hypertension, but most antihypertensive drugs are poorly water soluble and therefore have low bioavailability. These drugs are Pgp (P-glycoprotein) substrates and have problematic characteristics, such as a short half-life, poor intestinal permeability, and high dose frequency [159]. Antihypertensive drugs with poor absorption rates are ideal for MN-based drug delivery. MNs overcome the issues related to the oral delivery of antihypertensive drugs by increasing percutaneous absorption as the drug passes directly into the systemic circulation. MNs create micron-sized pores in the skin and disrupt only the stratum corneum and epidermis, but do not reach nerve fibers or blood vessels in the dermis. These MNs can deliver hypertensive drugs transdermally, potentially providing more effective treatment with fewer side effects than traditional oral medications [139].

Critical attributes of MNs for the transdermal delivery of hypertensive drugs include the material of the needles, the number of needles per patch, the length and diameter of the needles, and the method of drug loading onto the needles. The needles must be long enough to penetrate the skin’s stratum corneum but not so long that they reach the nerve fibers and cause pain. The diameter of the needles should be small enough to minimize discomfort but large enough to allow for efficient drug delivery. The number of needles per patch should be optimized for the desired drug dose and delivery rate. The material of the needles should be biocompatible and durable enough to withstand insertion into the skin [15].

One of the upcoming challenges associated with this approach is ensuring consistent drug delivery across various skin types and conditions. Skin thickness, hydration level, and other factors can affect the penetration of the needles and the delivery of the drug. Another challenge is optimizing the drug formulation and loading method for each specific drug to ensure optimal delivery efficiency and stability. Likewise, challenges with respect to dose delivery are also apparent, as relatively low doses can be used with the MNs. Furthermore, the repeated use of MNs at the exact location may cause swelling and skin irritation [103].

4.7. MNs Bypass First-Pass Metabolism and High Variability in Drug Plasma Levels of Antihypertensive Drugs

MN-based drug administration bypasses first-pass metabolism and reduces the variability in drug plasma levels by delivering the drug directly into the systemic circulation through the skin [132]. When taken orally, drugs are absorbed into the bloodstream through the digestive system and then metabolized by the liver before reaching the rest of the body. This process, known as first-pass metabolism, can reduce the bioavailability of drugs and result in variable plasma levels. First-pass metabolism limits oral absorption [160]. In contrast, MNs deliver drugs directly through the skin, bypassing the liver and the gastrointestinal tract, increasing the bioavailability of drugs, and resulting in more consistent plasma levels, leading to more effective treatment with fewer side effects. Furthermore, MN-based delivery offers a convenient, painless, and discreet alternative to traditional oral medications, increasing patient compliance and improving treatment outcomes [79]. Many patients with hypertension struggle to take their medications regularly due to side effects, difficulty swallowing, or forgetfulness. MNs can overcome these problems. Overall, MN-based drug administration has the potential to revolutionize the delivery of hypertensive drugs by increasing bioavailability, reducing side effects, and improving patient compliance [136].

4.8. Patents on MNs

As MN applications are a novel method for the transdermal delivery of therapeutic agents, many patent applications have been filed. Since hollow MNs may deliver more medicine than other microneedles, their design and delivery are the main topics of most of these patent applications. Hollow MN technology has received many patents due to its advantage of being able to administer a higher drug volume than other MNs [161,162]. However, there is limited data available on antihypertensive drug-loaded MN patents. Yet, a patent application, US7627938B2, titled “Tapered hollow metallic microneedle array assembly and method of making and using the same”, was published using the antihypertensive drug clonidine [163]. Another patent application, WO 2020/250210 A1, titled “Microneedles, and methods for the manufacture thereof”, was filed using antihypertensive drugs carvedilol and nifedipine as the pharmaceutical ingredients. The patent stated that MNs of the invention may incorporate up to 99% of the drug or more. The legal status of this patent is still pending [164].

Similarly, another patent, CN 110584633, titled “Real-time hypertension diagnosis and treatment integrated system capable of realising controllable medicine release”, was filed but is still pending. Moreover, patent EP 2005990 A2, titled “Microneedle Device And Transdermal Administration Device Provided With Microneedles”, stated that low molecular weight drugs, such as bisoprolol, can sustain the effect of the drug for a long period of time. Its legal status is still active [165]. It is worth noting that research and development in the field of MN-based drug delivery systems is constantly evolving, and there may have been advancements since then. There is still not much research on MN-based delivery of antihypertensive drugs. This area needs to be addressed, and further research work is required.

5. Conclusions

MNs are considered innovative drug delivery systems with unique benefits. They are the perfect platform for pharmaceutical and biological applications since they have improved pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy when delivering active substances to the targeted spot. They have offered groundbreaking solutions for the delivery of active therapeutic ingredients employing MNs in life-threatening conditions. All application areas, such as illness detection, disease therapy, immune-biological, dermatological, and aesthetic applications, have seen significant advancements. MNs play a crucial role in achieving a drug release profile; selecting the appropriate material, manufacturing procedure, needle geometry, and design is vital. Clinical trials on MNs have been conducted, demonstrating the scientific community’s significant interest in using devices for various therapeutic purposes. As a result, specific MN devices have made it to the commercial market. The development of these minimally invasive devices would provide a variety of therapeutic opportunities for drug delivery via buccal, oral, and ocular routes. Some studies have reported that MN-based delivery of antihypertensive drugs improves the transdermal delivery of these drugs. However, further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of MN in treating hypertension. They can be successfully adapted for clinical application after a greater grasp of the challenges and constraints of the MN-based delivery of antihypertensive drugs is developed. Ultimately, MN-based drug delivery holds the promise of revolutionizing the treatment of hypertension and improving patient outcomes. The current review paper sheds light on difficulties associated with oral drug delivery of antihypertensive medications, MN-based delivery of antihypertensive drugs, and their effect on hypertension.

References

1. Luu, E.; Ita, K.B.; Morra, M.J.; Popova, I.E. The influence of microneedles on the percutaneous penetration of selected antihypertensive agents: Diltiazem hydrochloride and perindopril erbumine. Curr. Drug Deliv. 2018, 15, 1449–1458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Lamirault, G.; Artifoni, M.; Daniel, M.; Barber-Chamoux, N. Resistant hypertension: Novel insights. Curr. Hypertens. Rev. 2019, 16, 61–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3. Al Ghorani, H.; Goetzinger, F.; Boehm, M.; Mahfoud, F. Arterial hypertension–Clinical trials update 2021. Nutr. Metab. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2022, 32, 21–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Erfanpoor, S.; Etemad, K.; Kazempour, S.; Hadaegh, F.; Hasani, J.; Azizi, F.; Parizadeh, D.; Khalili, D. Diabetes, hypertension, and incidence of chronic kidney disease: Is there any multiplicative or additive interaction? Int. J. Endocrinol. Metab. 2021, 19, e101061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
5. Redon, J.; Seeman, T.; Pall, D.; Suurorg, L.; Kamperis, K.; Erdine, S.; Wühl, E.; Mancia, G. Narrative update of clinical trials with antihypertensive drugs in children and adolescents. Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 2022, 9, 1042190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
6. Gress, T.W.; Nieto, F.J.; Shahar, E.; Wofford, M.R.; Brancati, F.L. Hypertension and antihypertensive therapy as risk factors for type 2 diabetes mellitus. N. Engl. J. Med. 2000, 342, 905–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
7. Rahimi, K.; Bidel, Z.; Nazarzadeh, M.; Copland, E.; Canoy, D.; Ramakrishnan, R.; Pinho-Gomes, A.-C.; Woodward, M.; Adler, A.; Agodoa, L. Pharmacological blood pressure lowering for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease across different levels of blood pressure: An individual participant-level data meta-analysis. Lancet 2021, 397, 1625–1636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
8. Canoy, D.; Copland, E.; Nazarzadeh, M.; Ramakrishnan, R.; Pinho-Gomes, A.-C.; Salam, A.; Dwyer, J.P.; Farzadfar, F.; Sundström, J.; Woodward, M. Antihypertensive drug effects on long-term blood pressure: An individual-level data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. Heart 2022, 108, 1281–1289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
9. Sinnott, S.-J.; Douglas, I.J.; Smeeth, L.; Williamson, E.; Tomlinson, L.A. First line drug treatment for hypertension and reductions in blood pressure according to age and ethnicity: Cohort study in UK primary care. BMJ 2020, 371, m4080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
10. Li, Z.; Fang, X.; Yu, D. Transdermal Drug Delivery Systems and Their Use in Obesity Treatment. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 12754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
11. Chen, Y.-S.; Sun, Y.-Y.; Qin, Z.-C.; Zhang, S.-Y.; Chen, W.-B.; Liu, Y.-Q. Losartan Potassium and Verapamil Hydrochloride Compound Transdermal Drug Delivery System: Formulation and Characterization. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 13051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
12. Selvam, R.P.; Singh, A.K.; Sivakumar, T. Transdermal drug delivery systems for antihypertensive drugs—A review. Int. J. Pharm. Biomed. Res. 2010, 1, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
13. Akhtar, N.; Singh, V.; Yusuf, M.; Khan, R.A. Non-invasive drug delivery technology: Development and current status of transdermal drug delivery devices, techniques and biomedical applications. Biomed. Eng./Biomed. Tech. 2020, 65, 243–272. [Google Scholar]
14. Jeong, W.Y.; Kwon, M.; Choi, H.E.; Kim, K.S. Recent advances in transdermal drug delivery systems: A review. Biomater. Res. 2021, 25, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
15. Avcil, M.; Çelik, A. Microneedles in drug delivery: Progress and challenges. Micromachines 2021, 12, 1321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
16. Bayda, S.; Adeel, M.; Tuccinardi, T.; Cordani, M.; Rizzolio, F. The history of nanoscience and nanotechnology: From chemical–physical applications to nanomedicine. Molecules 2019, 25, 112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
17. Sartawi, Z.; Blackshields, C.; Faisal, W. Dissolving microneedles: Applications and growing therapeutic potential. J. Control. Release 2022, 348, 186–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
18. Halder, J.; Gupta, S.; Kumari, R.; Gupta, G.D.; Rai, V.K. Microneedle array: Applications, recent advances, and clinical pertinence in transdermal drug delivery. J. Pharm. Innov. 2021, 16, 558–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19. Lee, M.-K. Liposomes for enhanced bioavailability of water-insoluble drugs: In vivo evidence and recent approaches. Pharmaceutics 2020, 12, 264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
20. Jung, J.H.; Jin, S.G. Microneedle for transdermal drug delivery: Current trends and fabrication. J. Pharm. Investig. 2021, 51, 503–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
21. Dahan, A.; Miller, J.M. The solubility–permeability interplay and its implications in formulation design and development for poorly soluble drugs. AAPS J. 2012, 14, 244–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
22. Kumar, G.; Virmani, T.; Pathak, K.; Alhalmi, A. A Revolutionary Blueprint for Mitigation of Hypertension via Nanoemulsion. BioMed Res. Int. 2022, 2022, 4109874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. Li, Y.; Liu, F.; Su, C.; Yu, B.; Liu, D.; Chen, H.-J.; Lin, D.-A.; Yang, C.; Zhou, L.; Wu, Q.; et al. Biodegradable therapeutic microneedle patch for rapid antihypertensive treatment. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2019, 11, 30575–30584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
24. Zhou, R.; Yu, J.; Gu, Z.; Zhang, Y. Microneedle-mediated therapy for cardiovascular diseases. Drug Deliv. Transl. Res. 2021, 12, 472–483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
25. Mdanda, S.; Ubanako, P.; Kondiah, P.P.; Kumar, P.; Choonara, Y.E. Recent advances in microneedle platforms for transdermal drug delivery technologies. Polymers 2021, 13, 2405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
26. Nandhini, S. Essential hypertension—A review article. J. Pharm. Sci. Res. 2014, 6, 305. [Google Scholar]
27. Carretero, O.A.; Oparil, S.J.C. Essential hypertension: Part I: Definition and etiology. Circulation 2000, 101, 329–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
28. Whelton, P.K.; Carey, R.M.; Mancia, G.; Kreutz, R.; Bundy, J.D.; Williams, B. Harmonization of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Hypertension Blood Pressure/Hypertension Guidelines: Comparisons, Reflections, and Recommendations. Eur. Heart J. 2022, 43, 3302–3311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
29. Unger, T.; Borghi, C.; Charchar, F.; Khan, N.A.; Poulter, N.R.; Prabhakaran, D.; Ramirez, A.; Schlaich, M.; Stergiou, G.S.; Tomaszewski, M. 2020 International Society of Hypertension global hypertension practice guidelines. Hypertension 2020, 75, 1334–1357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
30. Campbell, N.; Young, E.R.; Drouin, D.; Legowski, B.; Adams, M.A.; Farrell, J.; Kaczorowski, J.; Lewanczuk, R.; Lum-Kwong, M.M.; Tobe, S. A framework for discussion on how to improve prevention, management, and control of hypertension in Canada. Can. J. Cardiol. 2012, 28, 262–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
31. Ahad, A.; Al-Jenoobi, F.I.; Al-Mohizea, A.M.; Aqil, M.; Kohli, K. Transdermal delivery of calcium channel blockers for hypertension. Expert Opin. Drug Deliv. 2013, 10, 1137–1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
32. Ralston, R.; Lee, J.; Truby, H.; Palermo, C.; Walker, K.Z. A systematic review and meta-analysis of elevated blood pressure and consumption of dairy foods. J. Hum. Hypertens. 2012, 26, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
33. Kearney, P.M.; Whelton, M.; Reynolds, K.; Whelton, P.K.; He, J. Worldwide prevalence of hypertension: A systematic review. J. Hypertens. 2004, 22, 11–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
34. Messerli, F.H.; Williams, B.; Ritz, E. Essential hypertension. Lancet 2007, 370, 591–603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
35. Bartosh, S.M.; Aronson, A.J. Childhood hypertension: An update on etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. Pediatr. Clin. N. Am. 1999, 46, 235–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
36. Osmond, C.; Barker, D.J. Fetal, infant, and childhood growth are predictors of coronary heart disease, diabetes, and hypertension in adult men and women. Environ. Health Perspect. 2000, 108, 545–553. [Google Scholar]
37. Oparil, S.; Zaman, M.A.; Calhoun, D.A. Pathogenesis of hypertension. Ann. Intern. Med. 2003, 139, 761–776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
38. Contreras, F.; Rivera, M.; Vásquez, J.; De la Parte, M.; Velasco, M. Diabetes and hypertension physiopathology and therapeutics. J. Hum. Hypertens. 2000, 14, S26–S31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
39. Agrawal, U.; Sharma, R.; Gupta, M.; Vyas, S.P. Is nanotechnology a boon for oral drug delivery? Drug Discov. Today 2014, 19, 1530–1546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
40. Okur, N.Ü.; Siafaka, P.I.; Gökçe, E.H. Challenges in oral drug delivery and applications of lipid nanoparticles as potent oral drug carriers for managing cardiovascular risk factors. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 2021, 22, 892–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
41. Khadka, P.; Ro, J.; Kim, H.; Kim, I.; Kim, J.T.; Kim, H.; Cho, J.M.; Yun, G.; Lee, J. Pharmaceutical particle technologies: An approach to improve drug solubility, dissolution and bioavailability. Asian J. Pharm. Sci. 2014, 9, 304–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
42. Li, H.; Zhao, X.; Ma, Y.; Zhai, G.; Li, L.; Lou, H. Enhancement of gastrointestinal absorption of quercetin by solid lipid nanoparticles. J. Control. Release 2009, 133, 238–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
43. Batra, S.K.; Sardana, S. Research. A review on delivery of antihypertensive drugs through sublingual route. Int. J. Pharm. Sci. Res. 2017, 8, 4069–4076. [Google Scholar]
44. Sricharoen, P.; Poungnil, A.; Yuksen, C. Immediate prescription of oral antihypertensive agents in hypertensive urgency patients and the risk of revisits with elevated blood pressure. Open Access Emerg. Med. 2020, 12, 333–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
45. Khalil, H.; Zeltser, R. Antihypertensive medications. In StatPearls [Internet]; StatPearls Publishing: St. Petersburg, FL, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
46. Easterling, T.; Mundle, S.; Bracken, H.; Parvekar, S.; Mool, S.; Magee, L.A.; Von Dadelszen, P.; Shochet, T.; Winikoff, B. Oral antihypertensive regimens (nifedipine retard, labetalol, and methyldopa) for management of severe hypertension in pregnancy: An open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2019, 394, 1011–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
47. Katz, B.; Rosenberg, A.; Frishman, W.H. Controlled-release drug delivery systems in cardiovascular medicine. Am. Heart J. 1995, 129, 359–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
48. Sharma, N.; Upadhyay, P.K. Development and Characterization of Controlled Release Tablet Bearing Anti Hypertensive Drug. Eur. J. Mol. Clin. Med. 2022, 9, 623–637. [Google Scholar]
49. Khandai, M.; Chakraborty, S.; Sharma, A.; Panda, D.; Khanam, N.; Panda, S.K. Development of propranolol hydrochloride matrix tablets: An investigation on effects of combination of hydrophilic and hydrophobic matrix formers using multiple comparison analysis. Int. J. Pharm. Sci. 2010, 1, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
50. Al Ali, S.H.H.; Al-Qubaisi, M.; Hussein, M.Z.; Ismail, M.; Zainal, Z.; Hakim, M.N. Controlled release and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition properties of an antihypertensive drug based on a perindopril erbumine-layered double hydroxide nanocomposite. Int. J. Nanomed. 2012, 7, 2129–2141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
51. Alam, T.; Khan, S.; Gaba, B.; Haider, M.F.; Baboota, S.; Ali, J. Nanocarriers as treatment modalities for hypertension. Drug Deliv. 2017, 24, 358–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
52. Ahad, A.; Al-Mohizea, A.M.; Al-Jenoobi, F.I.; Aqil, M. Transdermal delivery of angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and others for management of hypertension. Drug Deliv. 2016, 23, 579–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
53. Bonfilio, R.; Mendonça, T.F.; Pereira, G.R.; Araújo, M.B.d.; Tarley, C.R.T. Losartan potassium dissolution test for drug release evaluation in pharmaceutical capsules using HPLC and UV spectrophotometry. Química Nova 2010, 33, 377–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
54. Ahad, A.; Raish, M.; Abdelrahman, I.A.; Jardan, Y.A.B.; Alam, M.A.; Al-Mohizea, A.M.; Al-Jenoobi, F.I. Changes in Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Losartan in Experimental Diseased Rats Treated with Curcuma longa and Lepidium sativum. Pharmaceuticals 2022, 16, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
55. Bajaj, A.; Rao, M.R.; Pardeshi, A.; Sali, D. Nanocrystallization by evaporative antisolvent technique for solubility and bioavailability enhancement of telmisartan. AAPS PharmSciTech 2012, 13, 1331–1340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
56. Kundu, S.; Kumari, N.; Soni, S.R.; Ranjan, S.; Kumar, R.; Sharon, A.; Ghosh, A. Enhanced solubility of telmisartan phthalic acid cocrystals within the pH range of a systemic absorption site. ACS Omega 2018, 3, 15380–15388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
57. Kato, Y.; Mukai, Y.; Rane, A.; Inotsume, N.; Toda, T.J.B.; Bulletin, P. The inhibitory effect of telmisartan on the metabolism of arachidonic acid by CYP2C9 and CYP2C8: An in vitro study. Biol. Pharm. Bull. 2017, 40, 1409–1415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
58. Sharma, M.; Sharma, R.; Jain, D.K.; Saraf, A. Enhancement of oral bioavailability of poorly water soluble carvedilol by chitosan nanoparticles: Optimization and pharmacokinetic study. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 135, 246–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
59. Ahad, A.; Al-Jenoobi, F.I.; Al-Mohizea, A.M.; Akhtar, N.; Raish, M.; Aqil, M. Systemic delivery of β-blockers via transdermal route for hypertension. Saudi Pharm. J. 2015, 23, 587–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
60. Zuber, R.; Anzenbacherová, E.; Anzenbacher, P. Cytochromes P450 and experimental models of drug metabolism. J. Cell. Mol. Med. 2002, 6, 189–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
61. Waldmeier, F.; Glaenzel, U.; Wirz, B.; Oberer, L.; Schmid, D.; Seiberling, M.; Valencia, J.; Riviere, G.-J.; End, P.; Vaidyanathan, S.; et al. Absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination of the direct renin inhibitor aliskiren in healthy volunteers. Drug Metab. Dispos. 2007, 35, 1418–1428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
62. Zisaki, A.; Miskovic, L.; Hatzimanikatis, V. Antihypertensive drugs metabolism: An update to pharmacokinetic profiles and computational approaches. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2015, 21, 806–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
63. Budhwaar, V.; Nanda, A. Simultaneous improvement of dissolution rate and stability of ramipril by formation of urea inclusion complexes. Int. J. Appl. Pharm. 2013, 5, 19–25. [Google Scholar]
64. Madurai, S.L.; Joseph, S.W.; Mandal, A.B.; Tsibouklis, J.; Reddy, B.S. Intestine-specific, oral delivery of captopril/montmorillonite: Formulation and release kinetics. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 2011, 6, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
65. Xie, F.; Van Bocxlaer, J.; Vermeulen, A. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modelling of lisinopril in children: A case story of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2021, 87, 1203–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
66. Qiang, G.; Yang, M.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, M.; Zhang, D.; Wang, G.; Han, J.; Xiao, X.; Wang, Z.; Liu, H. Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Study of Terazosin in Healthy Chinese Volunteers: Significant Hysteresis Phenomenon. J. Bioequiv. Availab. 2011, 3, 228–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
67. Ramirez, E.; Laosa, O.; Guerra, P.; Duque, B.; Mosquera, B.; Borobia, A.M.; Lei, S.H.; Carcas, A.J.; Frias, J. Acceptability and characteristics of 124 human bioequivalence studies with active substances classified according to the Biopharmaceutic Classification System. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2010, 70, 694–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
68. Jiang, C.; Jiang, X.; Wang, X.; Shen, J.; Zhang, M.; Jiang, L.; Ma, R.; Gan, T.; Gong, Y.; Ye, J. Transdermal iontophoresis delivery system for terazosin hydrochloride: An in vitro and in vivo study. Drug Deliv. 2021, 28, 454–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
69. Bateman, D.; Hobbs, D.; Twomey, T.; Stevens, E.; Rawlins, M. Prazosin, pharmacokinetics and concentration effect. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 1979, 16, 177–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
70. Bandgar, S.A.; Dhavale, P.; Patil, P.; Shelake, S.; Patil, S. Formulation and evaluation of prazosin hydrochloride loaded solid lipid nanoparticles. J. Drug Deliv. Ther. 2018, 8, 63–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
71. Kumar, L.; Meena, C.L.; Pawar, Y.B.; Wahlang, B.; Tikoo, K.; Jain, R.; Bansal, A.K. Effect of counterions on physicochemical properties of prazosin salts. AAPS PharmSciTech 2013, 14, 141–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
72. Reddy, L.H.; Ghosh, B. Enhancer aided in vitro permeation of atenolol and prazosin hydrochloride through mice skin. Indian J. Exp. Biol. 2001, 39, 47–51. [Google Scholar]
73. Genedy, S.; Khames, A.; Hussein, A.; Sarhan, H. Hydralazine HCl rapidly disintegrating sublingual tablets: Simple dosage form of higher bioavailability and enhanced clinical efficacy for potential rapid control on hypertensive preeclampsia. Drug Des. Dev. Ther. 2018, 12, 3753–3766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
74. McComb, M.N.; Chao, J.Y.; Ng, T.M. Direct vasodilators and sympatholytic agents. J. Cardiovasc. Pharmacol. Ther. 2016, 21, 3–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
75. Yang, X.; Johnson, N.; Di, L. Evaluation of cytochrome P450 selectivity for hydralazine as an aldehyde oxidase inhibitor for reaction phenotyping. J. Pharm. Sci. 2019, 108, 1627–1630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
76. Ozawa, M.; Tsume, Y.; Zur, M.; Dahan, A.; Amidon, G.L. Intestinal permeability study of minoxidil: Assessment of minoxidil as a high permeability reference drug for biopharmaceutics classification. Mol. Pharm. 2015, 12, 204–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
77. Jeong, S.-Y.; Park, J.-H.; Lee, Y.-S.; Kim, Y.-S.; Park, J.-Y.; Kim, S.-Y.J.P. The current status of clinical research involving microneedles: A systematic review. Pharmaceutics 2020, 12, 1113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
78. Nguyen, T.T.; Park, J.H. Human studies with microneedles for evaluation of their efficacy and safety. Expert Opin. Drug Deliv. 2018, 15, 235–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
79. Waghule, T.; Singhvi, G.; Dubey, S.K.; Pandey, M.M.; Gupta, G.; Singh, M.; Dua, K. Microneedles: A smart approach and increasing potential for transdermal drug delivery system. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2019, 109, 1249–1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
80. Zhang, W.; Zhang, W.; Li, C.; Zhang, J.; Qin, L.; Lai, Y. Recent Advances of Microneedles and Their Application in Disease Treatment. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 2401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
81. Nir, Y.; Paz, A.; Sabo, E.; Potasman, I. Fear of injections in young adults: Prevalence and associations. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2003, 68, 341–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
82. Gill, H.S.; Denson, D.D.; Burris, B.A.; Prausnitz, M.R. Effect of microneedle design on pain in human subjects. Clin. J. Pain 2008, 24, 585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
83. Larraneta, E.; Lutton, R.E.; Woolfson, A.D.; Donnelly, R.F. Microneedle arrays as transdermal and intradermal drug delivery systems: Materials science, manufacture and commercial development. Mater. Sci. Eng. R Rep. 2016, 104, 1–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
84. Kearney, M.-C.; Brown, S.; McCrudden, M.T.; Brady, A.J.; Donnelly, R.F. Potential of microneedles in enhancing delivery of photosensitising agents for photodynamic therapy. Photodiagn. Photodyn. Ther. 2014, 11, 459–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
85. Kim, Y.-C.; Park, J.-H.; Prausnitz, M.R. Microneedles for drug and vaccine delivery. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2012, 64, 1547–1568. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
86. Singh, P.; Carrier, A.; Chen, Y.; Lin, S.; Wang, J.; Cui, S.; Zhang, X. Polymeric microneedles for controlled transdermal drug delivery. J. Control. Release 2019, 315, 97–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
87. Anselmo, A.C.; Gokarn, Y.; Mitragotri, S. Non-invasive delivery strategies for biologics. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2019, 18, 19–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
88. Tuan-Mahmood, T.-M.; McCrudden, M.T.; Torrisi, B.M.; McAlister, E.; Garland, M.J.; Singh, T.R.R.; Donnelly, R.F. Microneedles for intradermal and transdermal drug delivery. Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 2013, 50, 623–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
89. Zhu, D.D.; Wang, Q.L.; Liu, X.B.; Guo, X.D. Rapidly separating microneedles for transdermal drug delivery. Acta Biomater. 2016, 41, 312–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
90. Cai, B.; Xia, W.; Bredenberg, S.; Li, H.; Engqvist, H. Bioceramic microneedles with flexible and self-swelling substrate. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2015, 94, 404–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
91. Griss, P.; Stemme, G. Side-opened out-of-plane microneedles for microfluidic transdermal liquid transfer. J. Microelectromech. Syst. 2003, 12, 296–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
92. Martanto, W.; Moore, J.S.; Couse, T.; Prausnitz, M.R. Mechanism of fluid infusion during microneedle insertion and retraction. J. Control. Release 2006, 112, 357–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
93. Verbaan, F.; Bal, S.; Van den Berg, D.; Groenink, W.; Verpoorten, H.; Lüttge, R.; Bouwstra, J. Assembled microneedle arrays enhance the transport of compounds varying over a large range of molecular weight across human dermatomed skin. J. Control. Release 2007, 117, 238–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
94. Park, J.-H.; Allen, M.G.; Prausnitz, M.R. Biodegradable polymer microneedles: Fabrication, mechanics and transdermal drug delivery. J. Control. Release 2005, 104, 51–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
95. Miyano, T.; Tobinaga, Y.; Kanno, T.; Matsuzaki, Y.; Takeda, H.; Wakui, M.; Hanada, K. Sugar micro needles as transdermic drug delivery system. Biomed. Microdevices 2005, 7, 185–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
96. Henry, S.; McAllister, D.V.; Allen, M.G.; Prausnitz, M.R. Microfabricated microneedles: A novel approach to transdermal drug delivery. J. Pharm. Sci. 1998, 87, 922–925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
97. Lee, J.W.; Han, M.-R.; Park, J.-H. Polymer microneedles for transdermal drug delivery. J. Drug Target. 2013, 21, 211–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
98. Donnelly, R.; Douroumis, D. Microneedles for drug and vaccine delivery and patient monitoring. Drug Deliv. Transl. Res. 2015, 5, 311–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
99. Al-Japairaia, K.A.S.; Mahmood, S.; Almurisi, S.H.; Venugopal, J.R.; Hilles, A.R.; Azmana, M.; Raman, S. Current trends in polymer microneedle for transdermal drug delivery. Intr. J. Pharm. 2020, 587, 119673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
100. Aldawood, F.K.; Andar, A.; Desai, S. A Comprehensive Review of Microneedles: Types, Materials, Processes, Characterizations and Applications. Polymers 2021, 13, 2815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
101. Li, Y.; Zhang, H.; Yang, R.; Laffitte, Y.; Schmill, U.; Hu, W.; Kaddoura, M.; Blondeel, E.J.; Cui, B. Fabrication of sharp silicon hollow microneedles by deep-reactive ion etching towards minimally invasive diagnostics. Microsyst. Nanoeng. 2019, 5, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
102. He, X.; Sun, J.; Zhuang, J.; Xu, H.; Liu, Y.; Wu, D. Microneedle system for transdermal drug and vaccine delivery: Devices, safety, and prospects. Dose-Response 2019, 17, 1559325819878585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
103. Nagarkar, R.; Singh, M.; Nguyen, H.X.; Jonnalagadda, S. A review of recent advances in microneedle technology for transdermal drug delivery. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 2020, 59, 101923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
104. Chen, J.; Qiu, Y.; Zhang, S.; Yang, G.; Gao, Y. Controllable coating of microneedles for transdermal drug delivery. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 2015, 41, 415–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
105. Ma, X.; Peng, W.; Su, W.; Yi, Z.; Chen, G.; Chen, X.; Guo, B.; Li, X. Delicate assembly of ultrathin hydroxyapatite nanobelts with nanoneedles directed by dissolved cellulose. Inorg. Chem. 2018, 57, 4516–4523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
106. Ullah, A.; Kim, C.M.; Kim, G.M. Porous polymer coatings on metal microneedles for enhanced drug delivery. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2018, 5, 171609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
107. Ita, K. Dissolving microneedles for transdermal drug delivery: Advances and challenges. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2017, 93, 1116–1127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
108. Kolli, C.S.; Banga, A.K. Characterization of solid maltose microneedles and their use for transdermal delivery. Pharm. Res. 2008, 25, 104–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
109. Li, J.; Zhou, Y.; Yang, J.; Ye, R.; Gao, J.; Ren, L.; Liu, B.; Liang, L.; Jiang, L. Fabrication of gradient porous microneedle array by modified hot embossing for transdermal drug delivery. Mater. Sci. Eng. C 2019, 96, 576–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
110. Meng, F.; Hasan, A.; Babadaei, M.M.N.; Kani, P.H.; Talaei, A.J.; Sharifi, M.; Cai, T.; Falahati, M.; Cai, Y. Polymeric-based microneedle arrays as potential platforms in the development of drugs delivery systems. J. Adv. Res. 2020, 26, 137–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
111. Guillot, A.J.; Cordeiro, A.S.; Donnelly, R.F.; Montesinos, M.C.; Garrigues, T.M.; Melero, A. Microneedle-based delivery: An overview of current applications and trends. Pharmaceutics 2020, 12, 569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
112. Economidou, S.N.; Lamprou, D.A.; Douroumis, D. 3D printing applications for transdermal drug delivery. Int. J. Pharm. 2018, 544, 415–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
113. Rad, Z.F.; Prewett, P.D.; Davies, G.J. An overview of microneedle applications, materials, and fabrication methods. Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 2021, 12, 1034–1046. [Google Scholar]
114. Tucak, A.; Sirbubalo, M.; Hindija, L.; Rahić, O.; Hadžiabdić, J.; Muhamedagić, K.; Čekić, A.; Vranić, E. Microneedles: Characteristics, materials, production methods and commercial development. Micromachines 2020, 11, 961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
115. Parhi, R.; Supriya, N.D. Review of microneedle based transdermal drug delivery systems. Int. J. Pharm. Sci. Nanotechnol. 2019, 12, 4511–4523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
116. Lee, K.; Lee, H.C.; Lee, D.S.; Jung, H. Drawing lithography: Three-dimensional fabrication of an ultrahigh-aspect-ratio microneedle. Adv. Mater. 2010, 22, 483–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
117. Hernandez-Montelongo, J.; Muñoz-Noval, A.; García-Ruíz, J.P.; Torres-Costa, V.; Martin-Palma, R.J.; Manso-Silvan, M. Nanostructured porous silicon: The winding road from photonics to cell scaffolds. A review. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2015, 3, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
118. Requena, M.B.; Permana, A.D.; Vollet-Filho, J.D.; González-Vázquez, P.; Garcia, M.R.; De Faria, C.M.G.; Pratavieira, S.; Donnelly, R.F.; Bagnato, V.S. Dissolving microneedles containing aminolevulinic acid improves protoporphyrin IX distribution. J. Biophotonics 2021, 14, e202000128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
119. Bhatnagar, S.; Gadeela, P.R.; Thathireddy, P.; Venuganti, V.V.K. Microneedle-based drug delivery: Materials of construction. J. Chemical Science. 2019, 131, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
120. Roxhed, N.; Gasser, T.C.; Griss, P.; Holzapfel, G.A.; Stemme, G. Penetration-enhanced ultrasharp microneedles and prediction on skin interaction for efficient transdermal drug delivery. J. Microelectromech. Syst. 2007, 16, 1429–1440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
121. Howells, O.; Blayney, G.J.; Gualeni, B.; Birchall, J.C.; Eng, P.F.; Ashraf, H.; Sharma, S.; Guy, O.J. Design, fabrication, and characterisation of a silicon microneedle array for transdermal therapeutic delivery using a single step wet etch process. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2022, 171, 19–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
122. Wang, M.; Hu, L.; Xu, C. Recent advances in the design of polymeric microneedles for transdermal drug delivery and biosensing. Lab Chip 2017, 17, 1373–1387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
123. McCaffrey, J.; McCrudden, C.M.; Ali, A.A.; Massey, A.S.; McBride, J.W.; McCrudden, M.T.; Vicente-Perez, E.M.; Coulter, J.A.; Robson, T.; Donnelly, R.F. Transcending epithelial and intracellular biological barriers; a prototype DNA delivery device. J. Control. Release 2016, 226, 238–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
124. Azmana, M.; Mahmood, S.; Hilles, A.R.; Mandal, U.K.; Al-Japairai, K.A.S.; Raman, S. Transdermal drug delivery system through polymeric microneedle: A recent update. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 2020, 60, 101877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
125. Bos, J.D.; Meinardi, M.M. The 500 Dalton rule for the skin penetration of chemical compounds and drugs. Exp. Dermatol. Viewp. 2000, 9, 165–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
126. Arya, J.; Henry, S.; Kalluri, H.; McAllister, D.V.; Pewin, W.P.; Prausnitz, M.R. Tolerability, usability and acceptability of dissolving microneedle patch administration in human subjects. Biomaterials 2017, 128, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
127. Donnelly, R.F.; Singh, T.R.R.; Woolfson, A.D. Microneedle-based drug delivery systems: Microfabrication, drug delivery, and safety. Drug Deliv. 2010, 17, 187–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
128. Lee, I.C.; Lin, W.M.; Shu, J.C.; Tsai, S.W.; Chen, C.H.; Tsai, M.T. Formulation of two-layer dissolving polymeric microneedle patches for insulin transdermal delivery in diabetic mice. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. Part A 2017, 105, 84–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
129. Kong, X.; Wu, C. Measurement and prediction of insertion force for the mosquito fascicle penetrating into human skin. J. Bionic Eng. 2009, 6, 143–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
130. Li, W.-Z.; Huo, M.-R.; Zhou, J.-P.; Zhou, Y.-Q.; Hao, B.-H.; Liu, T.; Zhang, Y. Super-short solid silicon microneedles for transdermal drug delivery applications. Int. J. Pharm. 2010, 389, 122–129. [Google Scholar]
131. Ma, G.; Wu, C. Microneedle, bio-microneedle and bio-inspired microneedle: A review. J. Control. Release 2017, 251, 11–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
132. Bariya, S.H.; Gohel, M.C.; Mehta, T.A.; Sharma, O.P. Microneedles: An emerging transdermal drug delivery system. J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2012, 64, 11–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
133. Amarnani, R.; Shende, P. Microneedles in diagnostic, treatment and theranostics: An advancement in minimally-invasive delivery system. Biomed. Microdevices 2022, 24, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
134. Donnelly, R.F.; Mooney, K.; Caffarel-Salvador, E.; Torrisi, B.M.; Eltayib, E.; McElnay, J.C. Microneedle-mediated minimally invasive patient monitoring. Ther. Drug Monit. 2014, 36, 10–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
135. Fancher, I.S.; Rubinstein, I.; Levitan, I. Potential strategies to reduce blood pressure in treatment-resistant hypertension using food and drug administration–approved nanodrug delivery platforms. Hypertension 2019, 73, 250–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
136. Ita, K.; Ashong, S. Percutaneous delivery of antihypertensive agents: Advances and challenges. AAPS PharmSciTech 2020, 21, 56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
137. Wong, W.F.; Ang, K.P.; Sethi, G.; Looi, C.Y. Recent Advancement of Medical Patch for Transdermal Drug Delivery. Medicina 2023, 59, 778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
138. Ahad, A.; Al-Saleh, A.A.; Al-Mohizea, A.M.; Al-Jenoobi, F.I.; Raish, M.; Yassin, A.E.B.; Alam, M.A. Pharmacodynamic study of eprosartan mesylate-loaded transfersomes Carbopol^® gel under Dermaroller^® on rats with methyl prednisolone acetate-induced hypertension. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2017, 89, 177–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
139. Kaur, M.; Ita, K.B.; Popova, I.E.; Parikh, S.J.; Bair, D.A. Microneedle-assisted delivery of verapamil hydrochloride and amlodipine besylate. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2014, 86, 284–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
140. Nalluri, B.N.; Uppuluri, C.; Devineni, J.; Nayak, A.; Nair, K.J.; Whiteside, B.R.; Das, D.B. Effect of microneedles on transdermal permeation enhancement of amlodipine. Drug Deliv. Transl. Res. 2017, 7, 383–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
141. Sardesai, M.; Shende, P. Engineering of nanospheres dispersed microneedle system for antihypertensive action. Curr. Drug Deliv. 2020, 17, 776–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
142. Zaid Alkilani, A.; Nimrawi, S.; Al-Nemrawi, N.K.; Nasereddin, J. Microneedle-assisted transdermal delivery of amlodipine besylate loaded nanoparticles. Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 2022, 48, 322–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
143. Helal, F.; Lane, M.E. Transdermal delivery of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors. Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. 2014, 88, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
144. T Nguyen, K.; B Ita, K.; J Parikh, S.; E Popova, I.; A Bair, D. Transdermal delivery of captopril and metoprolol tartrate with microneedles. Drug Deliv. Lett. 2014, 4, 236–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
145. Huang, Y.; Li, J.; Wang, Y.; Chen, D.; Huang, J.; Dai, W.; Peng, P.; Guo, L.; Lei, Y. Intradermal delivery of an angiotensin II receptor blocker using a personalized microneedle patch for treatment of hypertrophic scars. Biomater. Sci. 2023, 11, 583–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
146. Pineda-Álvarez, R.A.; Bernad-Bernad, M.J.; Rodríguez-Cruz, I.M.; Escobar-Chávez, J.J. Development and characterization of starch/gelatin microneedle arrays loaded with lecithin–gelatin nanoparticles of losartan for transdermal delivery. J. Pharm. Innov. 2020, 17, 71–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
147. Enggi, C.K.; Satria, M.T.; Nirmayanti, N.; Usman, J.T.; Nur, J.F.; Asri, R.M.; Djide, N.J.N.; Permana, A.D. Improved transdermal delivery of valsartan using combinatorial approach of polymeric transdermal hydrogels and solid microneedles: An ex vivo proof of concept investigation. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 2023, 34, 334–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
148. Usman, J.T.; Aliyah, A.; Nur, J.F.; Nirmayanti, N.; Dian, A. Combinatorial Approach of Polymeric Patches and Solid Microneedles for Improved Transdermal Delivery of Valsartan: A Proof-of-Concept Study. Biointerface Res. Appl. Chem. 2023, 13, 314. [Google Scholar]
149. Nirmayanti, N.; Alhidayah, A.; Usman, J.T.; Nur, J.F.; Amir, M.N.; Permana, A.D. Combinatorial Approach of Thermosensitive Hydrogels and Solid Microneedles to Improve Transdermal Delivery of Valsartan: An In Vivo Proof of Concept Study. AAPS PharmSciTech 2022, 24, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
150. Quinn, H.L.; Bonham, L.; Hughes, C.M.; Donnelly, R.F. Design of a dissolving microneedle platform for transdermal delivery of a fixed-dose combination of cardiovascular drugs. J. Pharm. Sci. 2015, 104, 3490–3500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
151. Almazan, E.A.; Castañeda, P.S.; Torres, R.D.; Escobar-Chavez, J.J. Design and evaluation of losartan transdermal patch by using solid microneedles as a physical permeation enhancer. Iran. J. Pharm. Res. IJPR 2020, 19, 138. [Google Scholar]
152. Aqil, M.; Sultana, Y.; Ali, A. Transdermal delivery of β-blockers. Expert Opin. Drug Deliv. 2006, 3, 405–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
153. He, J.; Zhang, Z.; Zheng, X.; Li, L.; Qi, J.; Wu, W.; Lu, Y. Design and evaluation of dissolving microneedles for enhanced dermal delivery of propranolol hydrochloride. Pharmaceutics 2021, 13, 579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
154. Pawar, K.R.; Smith, F.; Kolli, C.S.; Babu, R.J. Effect of lipophilicity on microneedle-mediated iontophoretic transdermal delivery across human skin in vitro. J. Pharm. Sci. 2013, 102, 3784–3791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
155. Ita, K.; Hatsakorzian, N.; Tolstikov, V. Microneedle-mediated delivery of atenolol and bisoprolol hemifumarate. J. Nanopharm. Drug Deliv. 2013, 1, 38–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
156. Jiang, D.; Jiang, Y.; Wang, K.; Wang, Z.; Pei, Y.; Wu, J.; He, C.; Mo, X.; Wang, H. Binary ethosomes-based transdermal patches assisted by metal microneedles significantly improve the bioavailability of carvedilol. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 2022, 74, 103498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
157. Roush, G.C.; Sica, D.A. Diuretics for hypertension: A review and update. Am. J. Hypertens. 2016, 29, 1130–1137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
158. Abu-Much, A.; Darawshi, R.; Dawud, H.; Kasem, H.; Ammar, A.A. Preparation and characterization of flexible furosemide-loaded biodegradable microneedles for intradermal drug delivery. Biomater. Sci. 2022, 10, 6486–6499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
159. Pridgen, E.M.; Alexis, F.; Farokhzad, O. Polymeric nanoparticle technologies for oral drug delivery. Clin. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2014, 12, 1605–1610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
160. Alqahtani, M.S.; Kazi, M.; Alsenaidy, M.A.; Ahmad, M.Z. Advances in oral drug delivery. Front. Pharmacol. 2021, 12, 618411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
161. Kuo, S.-C.; Chou, Y.-K. Microneedle Array Device and Its Fabrication Method. U.S. Patent US7712198B2, 11 May 2010. [Google Scholar]
162. Sullivan, V.J.; Pettis, R.J.; Mikszta, J.A.; Dekker, J.P., III; Woodley, W.D.; Wills, A.B.; Ferriter, M.S.; Hwang, C.R. Medicament Microdevice Delivery System, Cartridge and Method of Use. U.S. Patent USOO785 0663B2, 14 December 2010. [Google Scholar]
163. Kim, K.; Lee, J.-B. Tapered Hollow Metallic Microneedle Array Assembly and Method of Making and Using the Same. U.S. Patent US7627938B2, 8 December 2009. [Google Scholar]
164. Faisal, W.; Crean, A. Microneedles, and Methods for the Manufacture Thereof. European Patent WO2020250210A1, 17 December 2020. [Google Scholar]
165. Tokumoto, S.; Matsudo, T.; Kuwahara, T. Microneedle Device and Transdermal Administration Device Provided with Microneedles. European Patent WO2007116959, 18 October 2007. [Google Scholar]