4.8 Article

Water-compatible molecularly imprinted polymers obtained via high-throughput synthesis and experimental design

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
Volume 125, Issue 49, Pages 15101-15109

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ja0355473

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A technique allowing high-throughput synthesis and evaluation of molecularly imprinted polymer sorbents at a reduced scale (mini-MIPs) was developed and used for the optimization of MIPs for use in pure aqueous environments. The technique incorporated a 4-port liquid-handling robot for the rapid dispensing of monomers, templates, solvents and initiator into the reaction vessels of a 96-well plate. A library of 80 polymers, each ca. 50 mg, could thus be prepared in 24 h. The MIP rebinding capacity and selectivity could be rapidly assessed in the batch mode by quantifying nonbound fractions in parallel using a UV monochromator plate reader. This allowed a complete evaluation of the binding characteristics of an 80 polymer library in approximately 1 week. With the objective of optimizing a polymer imprinted with the local anaesthetic Bupivacaine for use in pure aqueous systems, a polymer library was prepared by varying the original poly(MAA-co-EDMA) MIP composition. The variable factors were the added amount of the hydrophilic comonomer, 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA), the cross-linking ratio, and the porogen. This optimization resulted in polymers showing high imprinting factors (IF = K-MIP/K-NIP) in water as a result, mainly, of reduced binding to the nonimprinted polymer. Normal scale batches of these materials showed strong retention of the template and low nonspecific binding when assessed as chromatographic stationary phases using pure phosphate buffer, pH 7.4, as mobile phase, by equilibrium batch rebinding experiments and as sorbents for extractions of the analyte from blood plasma samples.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available