Premium
Direct combination of immersed single‐drop microextraction with atmospheric pressure matrix‐assisted laser desorption/ionization tandem mass spectrometry for rapid analysis of a hydrophilic drug via hydrogen‐bonding interaction and comparison with liquid‐liquid extraction and liquid‐phase microextraction using a dual gauge microsyringe with a hollow fiber
Author(s) -
Wu HuiFen,
Lin ChiHsien
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
rapid communications in mass spectrometry
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.528
H-Index - 136
eISSN - 1097-0231
pISSN - 0951-4198
DOI - 10.1002/rcm.2612
Subject(s) - chemistry , chromatography , mass spectrometry , analytical chemistry (journal) , tandem mass spectrometry , detection limit , desorption , ionization , ion , adsorption , organic chemistry
This study presents the feasibility of direct coupling of the immersed single‐drop microextraction (SDME) technique with atmospheric pressure matrix‐assisted laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry (AP‐MALDI‐MS) for the rapid analysis of a hydrophilic drug (dopamine) from aqueous solution and human urine in an ion trap tandem mass spectrometer through hydrogen‐bonding interaction of dopamine with the extraction solvent (octanol). The optimum conditions for the SDME experiments coupled to AP‐MALDI/MS were: stirring rate, 240 rpm; extraction time, 5 min; sample pH value, 8; and matrix concentration, 2000 ppm, using α ‐cyano‐4‐hydroxycinnamic acid ( α ‐CHCA) as matrix. The limits of detection (LODs) for the SDME/AP‐MALDI‐MS experiments were 25 and 40 ppm in water and human urine, respectively. In a comparison of this method with the traditional liquid‐liquid extraction (LLE), the SDME method shows better LODs than the LLE (40 ppm) and the same LODs (25 ppm) as the liquid‐phase microextraction using a dual gauge microsyringe with a hollow fiber (LPME/DGM‐HF). However, the SDME method is more convenient than the LPME/DGM‐HF method. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.