Direkt zum Inhalt
Merck
  • Comparison of hollow fiber liquid-phase microextraction and ultrasound-assisted low-density solvent dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction for the determination of drugs of abuse in biological samples by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.

Comparison of hollow fiber liquid-phase microextraction and ultrasound-assisted low-density solvent dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction for the determination of drugs of abuse in biological samples by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.

Journal of chromatography. B, Analytical technologies in the biomedical and life sciences (2015-03-25)
Liang Meng, Wenwen Zhang, Pinjia Meng, Binling Zhu, Kefang Zheng
ZUSAMMENFASSUNG

Two microextraction techniques based on hollow fiber liquid-phase microextraction (HF-LPME) and ultrasound-assisted low-density solvent dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (UA-LDS-DLLME) had been applied for the determination of drugs of abuse (methamphetamine, amphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine, methcathinone, ketamine, meperidine, and methadone) in urine and blood samples by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Parameters affecting extraction efficiency have been investigated and optimized for both methods. Under the optimum conditions, linearities were observed for all analytes in the range 0.0030-10 μg/ml with the correlation coefficient (R) ranging from 0.9985 to 0.9995 for HF-LPME and in the range 0.0030-10 μg/ml with the R ranging from 0.9985 to 0.9994 for DLLME. The recovery of 79.3-98.6% with RSDs of 1.2-4.5% was obtained for HF-LPME, and the recovery of 79.3-103.4% with RSDs of 2.4-5.7% was obtained for DLLME. The LODs (S/N=3) were estimated to be in the range from 0.5 to 5 ng/ml and 0.5 to 4 ng/ml, respectively. Compared with HF-LPME, the UA-LDS-DLLME technique had the advantages of less extraction time, suitability for batches of sample pretreatment simultaneously, and higher extraction efficiency, while HF-LPME has excellent sample clean-up effect, and is a robust and suitable technique for various sample matrices with better repeatability. Both methods were successfully applied to the analysis of drugs of abuse in real human blood sample.

MATERIALIEN
Produktnummer
Marke
Produktbeschreibung

Sigma-Aldrich
Toluol, ACS reagent, ≥99.5%
Sigma-Aldrich
Toluol, HPLC Plus, for HPLC, GC, and residue analysis, ≥99.9%
Sigma-Aldrich
Hexan, ReagentPlus®, ≥99%
Sigma-Aldrich
Hexan, suitable for HPLC, ≥95%
Sigma-Aldrich
Cyclohexan, ACS reagent, ≥99%
Sigma-Aldrich
Benzol, suitable for HPLC, ≥99.9%
Sigma-Aldrich
Benzol, ACS reagent, ≥99.0%
Sigma-Aldrich
Cyclohexan, suitable for HPLC, ≥99.9%
Sigma-Aldrich
Hexan, Laboratory Reagent, ≥95%
Sigma-Aldrich
Hexan, HPLC Plus, for HPLC, GC, and residue analysis, ≥95%
Sigma-Aldrich
Butylacetat, ACS reagent, ≥99.5%
Sigma-Aldrich
Octyl-Acetat, ≥99%
Sigma-Aldrich
o-Xylen, reagent grade, ≥98.0%
Sigma-Aldrich
Toluol, anhydrous, 99.8%
Sigma-Aldrich
Butylacetat, suitable for HPLC, 99.7%
Sigma-Aldrich
Benzol, puriss. p.a., reag. Ph. Eur., ≥99.7%
Sigma-Aldrich
Toluol, ACS reagent, ≥99.5%
Supelco
Benzol, analytical standard
Sigma-Aldrich
Benzol, anhydrous, 99.8%
Sigma-Aldrich
Cyclohexanon, 99.8%
Sigma-Aldrich
Butylacetat, ReagentPlus®, 99.5%
Sigma-Aldrich
Cyclohexanon, ACS reagent, ≥99.0%
Sigma-Aldrich
Cyclohexan, anhydrous, 99.5%
Sigma-Aldrich
Cyclohexan, ACS reagent, ≥99%
Supelco
Hexan, analytical standard
Sigma-Aldrich
Butylacetat, ≥99%, FCC, FG
Sigma-Aldrich
o-Xylen, anhydrous, 97%
Sigma-Aldrich
Butylacetat, anhydrous, ≥99%
Sigma-Aldrich
Butylacetat, natural, ≥98%, FG
Supelco
Toluol, analytical standard