4.5 Article

Determination of 14 benzodiazepines and hydroxy metabolites, zaleplon and zolpidem as tert-butyldimethylsilyl derivatives compared with other common silylating reagents in whole blood by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jchromb.2004.12.032

Keywords

GC-MS; silylation; enzodiazepines; zolpidem; zaleplon

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The most common commercially available silylating reagents, N-methyl-N-(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide (MSTFA), N,O-bis-(trimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide + 1% trimethylchlorosilane (BSTFA + 1% TMCS) and N-methyl-N-(tert-butyldimethylsilyl)trifluoroacetamide (MTBSTFA) were evaluated to achieve optimal derivatization conditions for analyzing various benzodiazepines based on gas chromatography-electron impact ionization-mass spectrometry (GC-EI-MS). Sensitivity, repeatability, retention times and stability of the derivatives, as well as specificity of mass fragmentation, were studied in detail. Also other parameters affecting the derivatization chemistry of benzodiazepines are discussed. tert-Butyldimethylsilyl (TBDMS) derivatives proved to be more stable, reproducible and sensitive than corresponding trimethylsilyl (TMS) derivatives for the GC-EI-MS analysis of benzodiazepines. Based on the TBDMS derivatives, a rapid, reliable, sensitive and quantitative GC-MS method was developed for the determination of 14 benzodiazepines and two hydroxy metabolites, as well as two non-benzodiazepine hypnotic agents, zolpidem and zaleplon, using 500 mu l of whole blood. The method was completely validated in terms of accuracy, intra- and interday precision, limit of detection (LOD), limit of quantitation (LOQ), linearity, selectivity and extraction efficiency; these were all within the required limits, except for the accuracy of nitrazepam at a medium concentration level. (c) 2004 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

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available