4.6 Article

Single-drop liquid-phase microextraction for the determination of hypericin, pseudohypericin and hyperforin in biological fluids by high performance liquid chromatography

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1093, 期 1-2, 页码 1-10

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2005.07.038

关键词

pseudohypericin; hypericin; hyperforin; analysis; biological fluids; single-drop liquid-phase microextraction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The analysis of hypericin, pseudohypericin (collectively called in this study hypericins) and hyperforin in biological fluids is reported using single-drop liquid-phase microextraction in conjunction with HPLC-UV-fluorescence detection. A new option for analysis of the active principle constituents in biological samples is proposed, reducing the steps required prior to analysis. There are several parameters which determine the mass transfer such as the extraction solvent, drop and sample volumes, extraction time and temperature, pH and ionic strength, stirring rate and depth of needle tip in the bulk solution. These parameters were chosen to optimize the performance in the current study. The method was validated with respect to precision, accuracy and specificity. The intra-day precision values were below 2.3% for the high concentration level of control samples and 6.2% for the low level. The respective inter-day precision values were calculated to be below 4.4 and 7.1%, respectively, for the two concentration levels. Accuracy of the method, calculated as relative error, ranged from -2.6 to 7.0%. It was demonstrated that as long as the extraction procedure is consistently applied, quantitative analysis is performed accurately and reproducibly in human urine and plasma samples. Limits of quantitation (LOQs) in urine were calculated to be 3, 6 and 12 ng/ml for pseudohypericin, hypericin and hyperforin, respectively. Slightly higher limits were measured in plasma, i.e. 5, 12 and 20 ng/ml, for the respective analytes. (c) 2005 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

4.6
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