4.1 Article

Quantification of seven novel synthetic opioids in blood using LC-MS/MS

期刊

FORENSIC TOXICOLOGY
卷 37, 期 1, 页码 215-223

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11419-018-0458-1

关键词

Novel synthetic opioids; U-47700; W-18; W-15; Method validation; LC - MS; MS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PurposeThe objective of this study was to develop, optimize, and validate a method for the simultaneous quantification of U-47700, AH-7921, U-49900, U-50488, MT-45, W-18, and W-15 in whole blood using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS).MethodsBlood samples (500 mu L) were fortified with mixed calibrator or quality control (25 mu L) and internal standard (10 mu L) solutions. Analytes were isolated via a solid-phase extraction procedure. Analysis was performed using an Agilent 1290 Infinity II liquid chromatograph coupled to an Agilent 6470 triple quadrupole mass spectrometer. The method was validated in accordance with Scientific Working Group for Forensic Toxicology (SWGTOX) standard practices for method validation in forensic toxicology and applied to the analysis of postmortem blood specimens.ResultsLower limits of quantification were 0.25-1ng/mL and the upper limits of quantification were 100ng/mL. The coefficients of determination (R-2) for the calibration curves were>0.99. Analytical bias, within-run imprecision, and between-run imprecision were within15%,16%, and17%, respectively. All analytes were found to be stable at room temperature for 24h, refrigerated (4 degrees C) for 72h, and in the autosampler (4 degrees C) for 72h. Authentic blood samples (n=30) were analyzed using the validated method. Mean (range) U-47700 concentrations were 214 (3.2-1448) ng/mL in 15 cases.Conclusions A quantification method for seven synthetic opioids (U-47700, AH-7921, U-49900, U-50488, MT-45, W-18, and W-15) in whole blood was developed, optimized, and validated in accordance with SWGTOX standard practices for method validation in forensic toxicology. This sensitive method was successfully applied to postmortem casework.

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

4.1
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