4.4 Article

Graphene oxide/Fe3O4@polythionine nanocomposite as an efficient sorbent for magnetic solid-phase extraction followed by high-performance liquid chromatography for the determination of duloxetine in human plasma

期刊

CHEMICAL PAPERS
卷 72, 期 1, 页码 15-27

出版社

SPRINGER INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING AG
DOI: 10.1007/s11696-017-0253-1

关键词

Duloxetine; Graphene oxide/Fe3O4@polythionine; High-performance liquid hromatography; Human plasma; Magnetic solid-phase extraction

资金

  1. Islamic Azad University South Tehran Branch

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Herein, an efficient graphene oxide/Fe3O4@polythionine (GO/Fe3O4/PTh) nanocomposite sorbent was introduced for magnetic solid-phase extraction combined with high-performance liquid chromatography-ultraviolet detection of duloxetine (DLX) in human plasma. To prepare the sorbent, an oxidative polymerization of thionine on the surface of magnetic GO was utilized while PTh was simply used as a surface modifier to improve extraction efficiency. Transmission electron microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, X-ray diffraction, energy-dispersive X-ray analysis, vibrating sample magnetometry, Fourier transform-infrared spectroscopy and Brunauer-Emmett-Teller technique were applied to characterize the prepared nanoparticles. Firstly, effective parameters controlling the performance of the extraction process were evaluated in detail and optimized. Under the optimized conditions, calibration curve showed linearity in the range of 2-2500 ng mL(-1) with regression coefficient corresponding to 0.998. Limits of detection (LOD, S/N = 3) and quantification (LOQ, S/N = 10) were 0.5 and 2 ng mL(-1), respectively. Reasonable intra-assay (3.5-4.5%, n = 6) and inter-assay (3.8-6.7%, n = 9) precision represented acceptable performance of the procedure. The applicability of the method was successfully extended to the determination of DLX in human plasma after oral administration of 60 mg single dose of the drug and finally some pharmacokinetic data was achieved.

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

4.4
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