4.7 Article

Development of solid phase extraction strategies to minimize the effect of human urine matrix effect on the response of carnitine by UPLC-MS/MS

Journal

MICROCHEMICAL JOURNAL
Volume 129, Issue -, Pages 362-367

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.microc.2016.07.018

Keywords

Carnitine; SPE; UPLC-(+)ESI-MS/MS; Urine

Funding

  1. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y Tecnicas (CONICET)
  2. Agencia Nacional de Promocion Cientifica y Tecnologica
  3. Instituto de Quimica de San Luis (INQUISAL, UNSL-CONICET)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A rapid, selective and sensitive ultra-high performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) method was developed to determine carnitine in human urine. Solid phase extraction approaches based on the use of polymeric and weak cationic exchange cartridges were evaluated and applied to the treatment of urine samples. After optimizing the various stages of SPE, a satisfactory set up for retaining substances interfering on carnitine's response was achieved for both types of cartridges. The UPLC separation was carried out on a reversed phase column. The detection was performed on a triple quadrupole tandem mass spectrometer by multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode via electrospray ionization (ESI) source. Residual matrix components were specific to urine samples and interfered on the carnitine signal (a response suppression of 50% was observed). It was then demonstrated that sample treatment by SPE could reduce the effect of the above mentioned interferents, without needing a preliminary derivatization step. The recovery percentage of carnitine obtained after the application of SPE was of approximately 83 +/- 7% and, consequently, the matrix effect was minimized. Thus, a sensitive, precise and reliable methodology was developed to determine traces of carnitine in biological fluids. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available