4.6 Article

Development and Validation of Multi-Residue Method for Drugs Analysis in Human Feces by Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry

期刊

MOLECULES
卷 27, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules27051474

关键词

antibiotic; food of animal origin; water; feces; food; HPLC-MS; MS

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of veterinary drugs in animal production is a common practice to ensure animal and human health. However, residues of these drugs could be found in animal food products, as well as in the environment, exposing humans to these substances. This study developed a multiclass method to analyze various pharmaceuticals in human feces, revealing the involuntary exposure of human gut microbiota to active substances such as pharmaceuticals.
The use of veterinary drugs in animal production is a common practice to secure animal and human health. However, residues of administrated drugs could be present in animal food products. Levels of drugs in food of animal origin are regulated within the European Union. In recent years, residues have been detected not only in food, but also in the environmental elements such as water or soil, meaning that humans are involuntarily exposed to these substances. This article presents a multiclass method for the analysis of various therapeutic groups of pharmaceuticals in human feces. Pharmaceuticals are extracted from feces with an acid extraction solvent, and after filtration the extract was analyzed by HPLC-MS/MS. A limit of detection of 10 ng/g was achieved for 9 pharmaceuticals, with linearity over 0.99 and repeatability and reproducibility lower than 20%. The method was satisfactorily applied in 25 feces samples of individuals that had declared not to be under medical treatment for the last two months. Results indicate the presence of six different compounds at concentration between 10 and 456 ng/g. This preliminary study showed the involuntary exposure of human gut microbiota to active substances such as pharmaceuticals

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

4.6
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