4.5 Article

Determination of amphetamine-type stimulants, ketamine and metabolites in fingernails by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

期刊

FORENSIC SCIENCE INTERNATIONAL
卷 194, 期 1-3, 页码 108-114

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.10.023

关键词

Amphetamine-type stimulants; Ketamine; GC-MS; Nail analysis

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (MEST) [M10640010000-06N4001-00100]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) method was developed and validated for the simultaneous qualification and quantification of methamphetamine (MA), amphetamine (AP), 3,4-methylenedioxy-N-methylamphetamine (MDMA), 3,4-methylenedioxy-N-amphetamine (MDA), ketamine (KET) and norketamine (NKT) in fingernails. Fingernail samples (20 mg) were washed with distilled water and methanol, digested with 1.0 M sodium hydroxide at 95 degrees C for 30 min, and then extracted with ethyl acetate. Extract solutions were evaporated to dryness, derivatized using heptafluorobutyric anhydride (HFBA) at 60 degrees C for 30 min, and analyzed by GC-MS. The linear ranges were 0.1-20.0 ng/mg for AP, MDMA and NKT, 0.2-20.0 ng/mg for MA and MDA, and 0.4-20.0 ng/mg for KET, with the coefficients of determination (r(2) >= 0.9989). The intra-and inter-day precisions were within 7.1% and 10.6%, respectively. The intra- and inter-day accuracies were -10.9% to 0.8% and -4.3% to 4.5%, respectively. The limits of detections (LODs) and the limits of quantifications (LOQs) for each analyte were lower than 0.094 ng/mg and 0.314 ng/mg, respectively. The recoveries were in the range of 72.3-94.9%. The average fingernail growth rates of two subjects for three years and six subjects for two months were 3.12 mm/month and 3.16 mm/month, respectively. The method proved to be suitable also for the simultaneous detection and quantification of MA, MDMA, KET and their metabolites in fingernails. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. 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

4.5
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