4.7 Article

Determination of thimerosal in human and veterinarian vaccines by photochemical vapor generation coupled to ICP OES

期刊

JOURNAL OF ANALYTICAL ATOMIC SPECTROMETRY
卷 25, 期 10, 页码 1627-1632

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c0ja00029a

关键词

-

资金

  1. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq, Brazil)
  2. Fundacao Araucaria (Parana, Brazil)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A simple and fast method is described for the determination of Hg, present as thimerosal, in vaccines by photochemical vapor generation coupled to axial view inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry. Mercury emission was detected at 253.652 nm. No sample treatment was necessary other than simple dilution and addition of 10% v/v formic acid. Vapor generation conditions were optimized and included formic acid concentration, sample flow rate, reactor tube dimensions and argon flow rate. External calibration was achieved using aqueous standard solutions of Hg(2+) containing 10% v/v formic acid. The detection limit (3 s, n = 10) was 0.3 mu g L(-1) of Hg or 0.6 mu g L(-1) of thimerosal in solution, equivalent to 60.0 mu g L(-1) of thimerosal in the original vaccine solution or 0.03 mu g of thimerosal per dose. The procedure was applied to the analysis of anti-rabies, diphtheria/tetanus, hepatitis B and influenza vaccines, sourced from two producers. Thimerosal was present in the vaccines within a narrow range of 47.4 +/- 0.4 to 53.7 +/- 0.7 mu g per dose (0.5 mL vaccine), in agreement with product information, except for the influenza vaccine from one of the producers, for which the thimerosal mass per dose was below the detection limit. Recoveries of 93-102% demonstrated the robustness of the methodology. Precision, expressed as relative standard deviation, yielded 2.9% under conditions of repeatability and 4.4% for reproducibility. This simple procedure is currently adopted by Tecpar (Curitiba, Brazil) to control the amount of thimerosal in anti-rabies vaccines.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据