Development and Validation of a Method for Quantification of 28 Psychotropic Drugs in Postmortem Blood Samples by Modified Micro-QuEChERS and LC–MS-MS

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taís B Rodrigues ◽  
Damila R Morais ◽  
Victor A P Gianvecchio ◽  
Elvis M Aquino ◽  
Ricardo L Cunha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sample Preparation ◽  
Forensic Toxicology ◽  
Sample Volume ◽  
Weighting Factor ◽  
Liquid Extraction ◽  
Analytical Toxicology ◽  
Limit Of Quantification ◽  
Liquid Liquid Extraction ◽  
Postmortem Blood ◽  
Development And Validation

Abstract The development of new sample preparation alternatives in analytical toxicology leading to quick, effective, automated and environmentally friendly procedures is growing in importance. One of these alternatives is the QuEChERS, originally developed for the analysis of pesticide residues, producing cleaner extracts than liquid–liquid extraction, and easier separation of aqueous and organic phases. However, there are few published studies on the miniaturization of this technique for forensic toxicology, especially in postmortem analysis. We developed and validated a modified micro-QuEChERS and LC–MS-MS assay to quantify 16 antidepressants, 7 antipsychotics and 3 metabolites and semi-quantify norfluoxetine and norsertraline in postmortem blood. The calibration curve was linear from 1 to 500 ng/mL, achieved an r > 0.99, with all standards quantifying within ±15% of target except ±20% at the limit of quantification of 1 ng/mL for 26 substances. The F test was applied to evaluate if the variance between replicates remained constant for all calibrators. Six weighting factors were analyzed (1/x, 1/x2, 1/x0,5, 1/y, 1/y2 and 1/y0,5), with the weighting factor with the lowest sum of residual regression errors (1/x2) selected. No endogenous or exogenous interferences were observed. Method imprecision and bias were <19.0% and 19.7%, respectively. Advantages of this method include a low sample volume of 100 µL, simple but effective sample preparation and a rapid 8.5-min run time. The validated analytical method was successfully applied to the analysis of 100 authentic postmortem samples.

scholarly journals Determination of Genotoxic Azide Impurity in Cilostazol API by Ion Chromatography with Matrix Elimination

Separations ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. 162
Author(s):  
Boglárka Páll ◽  
Zsuzsa Gyenge ◽  
Róbert Kormány ◽  
Krisztián Horváth
Keyword(s):  
Sample Preparation ◽  
Ion Chromatography ◽  
Sodium Azide ◽  
Limit Of Detection ◽  
Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient ◽  
Liquid Extraction ◽  
Limit Of Quantification ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Liquid Liquid Extraction

Cilostazol is a commonly used active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) to treat and reduce the symptoms of intermittent claudication in peripheral vascular disease. Recently, it was found to be a potential medicine in the effective treatment of COVID-19. In addition to the positive effects of this API, genotoxic sodium azide is used in the synthesis of cilostazol that can appear in the API. In this work, a method was developed for the determination of sodium azide (as azide anion) in cilostazol API at 7.5 ppm limit level by using ion chromatography (IC) and liquid–liquid extraction (LLE) sample preparation. The liquid–liquid extraction allows the application of high sample concentrations. Because of the low limit concentration (7.5 ppm), 500 mg sample was dissolved in 5 mL solvent. By using LLE for sample preparation, the huge amount of cilostazol was omitted and column overload was avoided. The developed method was validated in accordance with the relevant guidelines. Specificity, accuracy, precision, limit of detection and limit of quantification parameters were evaluated. The calculated limit of detection was 0.52 ppm (S/N:3) and the limit of quantification was 1.73 ppm (S/N:10) for sodium azide. The recovery of the sodium azide was 102.4% and the prepared solutions were stable in the sample holder for 24 h.

Supported liquid extraction offers improved sample preparation for aldosterone analysis by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry

2012 ◽  
Vol 65 (11) ◽  
pp. 1045-1048 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Grace Van Der Gugten ◽  
Matthew Crawford ◽  
Russell P Grant ◽  
Daniel T Holmes
Keyword(s):  
Sample Preparation ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Sample Volume ◽  
Liquid Extraction ◽  
Tandem Mass ◽  
Liquid Liquid Extraction ◽  
Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Accuracy And Precision ◽  
Serum Aldosterone ◽  
Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass

BackgroundTo evaluate the accuracy and precision of a method for serum aldosterone using supported liquid extraction (SLE) for sample preparation instead of the more conventional liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) approach.MethodsTwo independently developed SLE-based LC-MS/MS methods for serum aldosterone (sample volumes 250 μl and 300 μl respectively) were compared to a modification of a previously reported LLE approach (sample volume 500 μl) in two method comparisons (n=75 and n=97). SLE analyses were performed at two separate centres. Precision was evaluated at a single site using human pools in head-to-head comparison between SLE and LLE. All analyses were performed on the ABSCIEX API-5000 LC-MS/MS system.ResultsAt four increasing pool concentrations spanning 67-1060 pmol/l, total precision for SLE ranged from 6.8-4.1% compared with 11.1-4.3% for LLE. Differences did not reach statistical significance except at the lowest concentration where SLE was superior. Pasing Bablok regression comparisons were SLE=0.96×LLE-5.8 pmol/l (R2=0.985) and SLE=0.96×LLE-0.44 pmol/l (R2=0.969).ConclusionsFor analysis of serum aldosterone on the ABSCIEX API-5000, SLE affords a smaller sample volume while maintaining the accuracy and precision performance of LLE. By avoiding specimen vortexing, SLE also allows for greater automation in the sample preparation.

scholarly journals Application of the Dehydration Homogeneous Liquid–Liquid Extraction (DHLLE) Sample Preparation Method for Fingerprinting of Honey Volatiles

Molecules ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 2277
Author(s):  
Piotr M. Kuś ◽  
Igor Jerković
Keyword(s):  
Carboxylic Acid ◽  
Sample Preparation ◽  
Preparation Method ◽  
Liquid Extraction ◽  
Sample Preparation Method ◽  
Phenyllactic Acid ◽  
Homogeneous Liquid ◽  
Liquid Liquid Extraction ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Chemical Groups

Recently, we proposed a new sample preparation method involving reduced solvent and sample usage, based on dehydration homogeneous liquid–liquid extraction (DHLLE) for the screening of volatiles and semi-volatiles from honey. In the present research, the method was applied to a wide range of honeys (21 different representative unifloral samples) to determine its suitability for detecting characteristic honey compounds from different chemical classes. GC-FID/MS disclosed 130 compounds from different structural and chemical groups. The DHLLE method allowed the extraction and identification of a wide range of previously reported specific and nonspecific marker compounds belonging to different chemical groups (including monoterpenes, norisoprenoids, benzene derivatives, or nitrogen compounds). For example, DHLLE allowed the detection of cornflower honey chemical markers: 3-oxo-retro-α-ionols, 3,4-dihydro-3-oxoedulan, phenyllactic acid; coffee honey markers: theobromine and caffeine; linden honey markers: 4-isopropenylcyclohexa-1,3-diene-1-carboxylic acid and 4-(2-hydroxy-2-propanyl)cyclohexa-1,3-diene-1-carboxylic acid, as well as furan derivatives from buckwheat honey. The obtained results were comparable with the previously reported data on markers of various honey varieties. Considering the application of much lower volumes of very common reagents, DHLLE may provide economical and ecological advantages as an alternative sample preparation method for routine purposes.

scholarly journals Lipemia in the Plasma Sample Affects Fentanyl Measurements by Means of HPLC-MS2 after Liquid-Liquid Extraction

Molecules ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (15) ◽  
pp. 4514
Author(s):  
Marta Tikhomirov ◽  
Tomasz Śniegocki ◽  
Błażej Poźniak
Keyword(s):  
Forensic Toxicology ◽  
Liquid Extraction ◽  
Rabbit Plasma ◽  
Chromatography Method ◽  
Method Performance ◽  
Liquid Liquid Extraction ◽  
Normal Plasma ◽  
Validation Procedure ◽  
Liquid Chromatography Method ◽  
The Impact

Examination of fentanyl levels is frequently performed in certain scientific evaluations and forensic toxicology. It often involves the collection of very variable blood samples, including lipemic plasma or serum. To date, many works have reported the methods for fentanyl detection, but none of them have provided information about the impact on the assay performance caused by an excessive amount of lipids. This aspect may be, however, very important for highly lipophilic drugs like fentanyl. To address this issue, we developed the liquid chromatography method with mass spectrometry detection and utilized it to investigate the impact of lipids presence in rabbit plasma on the analytical method performance and validation. The validation procedure, conducted for normal plasma and lipemic plasma separately, resulted in good selectivity, sensitivity and linearity. The limits of detection and quantification were comparable between the two matrices, being slightly lower in normal plasma (0.005 and 0.015 µg/L) than in lipemic plasma (0.008 and 0.020 µg/L). Liquid–liquid extraction provided a low matrix effect regardless of the lipid levels in the samples (<10%), but pronounced differences were found in the recovery and accuracy. In the normal plasma, this parameter was stable and high (around 100%), but in the lipemic matrix, much more variable and less efficient results were obtained. Nevertheless, this difference had no impact on repeatability and reproducibility. In the present work, we provided reliable, convenient and sensitive method for fentanyl detection in the normal and lipemic rabbit plasma. However, construction of two separate validation curves was necessary to provide adequate results since the liquid-liquid extraction was utilized. Therefore, special attention should be paid during fentanyl quantification that involves lipemic plasma samples purified by this technique.

scholarly journals The Development and Validation of a Novel Designer Benzodiazepines Panel by LC–MS-MS

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca A Mastrovito ◽  
Donna M Papsun ◽  
Barry K Logan
Keyword(s):  
Illicit Drug ◽  
Liquid Extraction ◽  
Electrospray Tandem Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Method Performance ◽  
Internal Standards ◽  
Liquid Liquid Extraction ◽  
Relative Standard ◽  
Development And Validation ◽  
Positive Ion ◽  
Designer Benzodiazepines

Abstract Novel illicit benzodiazepines are among the most active areas of new illicit drug manufacture and use. We describe a method for the detection and quantification of etizolam and its metabolite α-hydroxyetizolam, flubromazolam, clonazolam, diclazepam, delorazepam, bromazepam, flubromazepam, phenazepam, flualprazolam, flunitrazolam, and nitrazolam in human whole blood. After addition of internal standards, samples are buffered and extracted using a liquid–liquid extraction. Analysis is performed using positive-ion electrospray tandem mass spectrometry for detection and quantitation. Calibration ranges were established based on the method performance and differed from compound to compound. Replicates at the lowest calibration point for each compound performed within 5% of CV (Coefficient of Variation). The correlation coefficient was &gt;0.990 for all compounds. Relative standard deviation for all compounds was ≤10% of CV and accuracy was  ±10% for both within- and between-run experiments. The maximum average intra- and inter-run imprecision were 5.7%. The maximum average intra- and inter-run imprecision was −8.7%. As part of evaluating the scope for relevancy, samples testing positive in immunoassay but confirmed to be negative in traditional benzodiazepine confirmation method were re-analyzed using this method. The presence of at least one novel benzodiazepine was identified in 70% of these samples. The appearance of these novel “designer” benzodiazepines demonstrates the challenge for toxicology testing and the need for continually updated confirmation methods.

The Benefits and Limitations of Methods Development in Solid Phase Extraction: Mini Review

2014 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Norfahana Abd-Talib ◽  
Siti Hamidah Mohd-Setapar ◽  
Aidee Kamal Khamis
Keyword(s):  
Sample Preparation ◽  
Solid Phase Extraction ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Liquid Extraction ◽  
Phase Extraction ◽  
Methods Development ◽  
Liquid Liquid Extraction ◽  
Target Analytes ◽  
Two Phases ◽  
Preparation Techniques

Over recent years, there has been an explosive growth of sample preparation techniques. Sample preparation is in most cases meant to be the isolation online or offline concentration of some components of interest or target analytes. Solid phase extraction (SPE) is a very popular technique nowadays in sample preparation. The principal is quite similar with liquid- liquid extraction (LLE) which involves partition of solutes between two phases. But, there are some differences between them and some benefits and limitations of difference types of SPE technique like presented in this paper.

scholarly journals Comparison of two sample preparation procedures for HPLC determination of ochratoxin A

2009 ◽  
Vol 61 (4) ◽  
pp. 639-644 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gorica Vukovic ◽  
Snezana Pavlovic ◽  
M.S. Ristic
Keyword(s):  
Sample Preparation ◽  
Phosphoric Acid ◽  
Ochratoxin A ◽  
Chromatographic Determination ◽  
Liquid Extraction ◽  
Immunoaffinity Column ◽  
Maize Flour ◽  
Liquid Liquid Extraction ◽  
Immunoaffinity Columns

In preparation of samples for chromatographic determination of ochratoxin A, two types of columns were used for sample cleanup (SPE and immunoaffinity columns). The first method consisted of liquid-liquid extraction with a mixture of chloroform and phosphoric acid, followed by ion-exchange cleanup on Waters Oasis MAX columns. The sec?ond method consisted of extraction with a mixture of water and methanol, followed by LCTech OtaCLEAN immunoaf?finity column cleanup. Recoveries of the methods were determined at three levels in three repetitions for maize flour, and they were 84% (%RSD = 19.2) for the first method of sample preparation and 101% (%RSD = 2.2) for the second method. Values of LOQ for OTA were 0.25 and 1.00 ?g/kg for the IAC and SPE clean-up procedures, respectively. Both methods comply with present regulations, but the MAX sample clean-up procedure should be used as an alternative, since the immunoaffinity column clean-up procedure is characterized by better reproducibility, accuracy, and efficiency.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document