4.7 Article

Pipette tip solid-phase extraction and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry for the determination of mequitazine in human plasma

期刊

TALANTA
卷 70, 期 2, 页码 474-478

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2006.02.059

关键词

mequitazine; pipette tip solid-phase extraction; gas chromatography; mass spectrometry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mequitazine has been found to be extractable from human plasma samples using MonoTip C-18 tips, inside which C-18-bonded monolithic silica gel was fixed. Human plasma (0.1 mL) containing mequitazine and cyproheptadine as an internal standard (IS) was mixed with 0.4 mL of distilled water and 25 mu L of I M potassium phosphate buffer (pH 8.0). After centrifugation of the mixture, the supernatant fraction was extracted to the C-18 phase of the tip by 25 repeated aspirating/dispensing cycles using a manual micropipettor. The analytes retained on the C-18 phase were then eluted with methanol by five repeated aspirating/dispensing cycles. Without evaporation and reconstitution, the eluate was injected into a gas chromatograph injector and detected by a mass spectrometer with selected ion monitoring in the positive-ion electron impact mode. The separation of mequitazine and the IS from each other and from impurities was generally satisfactory using a DB-1MS capillary column (30 m x 0.32 mm i.d., film thickness 0.25 mu m). The recoveries of mequitazine and the IS spiked into plasma were more than 90.0%. The regression equation for mequitazine showed excellent linearity in the range of 0.2-200 ng 0.1 mL(-1), and the detection limit was 0.05 ng 0.1 mL(-1) of plasma. The intra-day and inter-day coefficients of variation for mequitazine in human plasma were not greater than 8.16 and 9.24%, respectively. Accuracy for the drug was in the range of 90.0-97.4%. The data obtained from determination of mequitazine in human plasma after oral administration of the drug are also presented. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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