4.5 Article

Application of the standard addition approach for the quantification of urinary benzene

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchromb.2005.01.013

Keywords

urinary benzene; standard addition approach; occupational exposure

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Urinary benzene is used as biomarker of exposure to evaluate the uptake of this solvent both in non-occupationally exposed population and in benzene-exposed workers. The quantitative determination of benzene in urine is carried out in a three steps procedure: urine collection, sample analysis by head space/solid phase microextraction/gas chromatography/mass spectrometry and analyte quantification. The adopted quantification method influences the initial step, hence the whole procedure. Two quantification approaches were compared as regards precision and accuracy: the calibration curves and the standard addition method. Even if calibration curves obtained by using urine samples from different subjects were always linear, their slopes and intercepts showed noteworthy variations, attributable to the influence of the biological matrix on benzene recovery. The standard addition method showed to be more suitable for compensating matrix effects, and a three-point standard addition protocol was used to quantify benzene in urine samples of 11 benzene-exposed workers (smokers and nonsmokers). Urine from occupationally exposed workers was collected before and after work-shift. Besides urinary benzene, the applicability of the method was verified by measuring the urinary concentration of the S-phenylmercapturic acid, a specific benzene metabolite, generally adopted as biomarker in biological monitoring procedures. A similar trend of concentration levels of both analytes measured in urine samples collected before work-shift with respect to the after work-shift ones was found, showing the actual applicability of the standard addition method for biological monitoring purposes. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All fights 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

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available