4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Electrochemiluminoimmunoassay of hTSH at disposable oxide-coated n-silicon electrodes

期刊

JOURNAL OF ELECTROANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 524, 期 -, 页码 176-183

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/S0022-0728(02)00638-1

关键词

immunoassay; hTSH; silicon; thermal SiO(2); electrochemiluminescence; time-resolved detection; Tb(III) chelates

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cathodic pulse polarisation of thin insulating film-coated electrodes enables the generation of electrochemiluminescence (ECL) by tunnel emission of hot electrons from the Fermi level of the conductor material of the conductor-insulator-aqueous electrolyte solution junction to the solutes at the vicinity of the electrode surface and probably also to the conduction band of water. The latter process can generate hydrated electrons as strongly reducing slightly longer-lived cathodic intermediates, which are known to be able to induce chemiluminescence (CL) of various types of luminophores having very different photophysical and chemical properties. The generation of the above-mentioned cathodic primary species provides good possibilities to use many types of luminophores as label molecules in sensitive immuno and DNA-probing assays. This paper introduces an electrochemiluminoimmunoassay (ECLIA) for human thyroid stimulating hormone (hTSH) at oxide-coated n-silicon electrodes and demonstrates the suitability of silicon electrodes covered with thermally grown silicon dioxide film as disposable working electrodes (WEs) in sensitive time-resolved ECL (tr-ECL) measurements in aqueous solution. The label chelate can be detected almost down to picomolar level and the calibration curve of the chelate covers more than five orders of magnitude of chelate concentration. Also the calibration curve of the immunometric hTSH assay was found to be linear over a wide range of hTSH concentration, the detection limit of the hormone being below 1 mU l(-1) (4 pmol l(-1)). (C) 2002 Elsevier Science 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