Ultra‐high performance supercritical fluid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry for antidoping analyses: Assessment of the inter‐laboratory reproducibility with urine samples
Autor: | Kateřina Plachká, Emmanuelle Bichon, Fabrice Monteau, Raul Nicoli, Gioacchino Luca Losacco, Jean-Luc Veuthey, Bruno Le Bizec, Lucie Nováková, Davy Guillarme, Marco Rentsch, Tiia Kuuranne |
---|---|
Rok vydání: | 2020 |
Předmět: |
ddc:615
Inter‐laboratory reproducibility Analyte Reproducibility Chromatography Ultra high‐performance Tandem mass spectrometry Chemistry Urine Supercritical fluid chromatography Stationary phase Anti‐doping analyses General Earth and Planetary Sciences Inter-laboratory Ultra high performance General Environmental Science |
Zdroj: | Analytical Science Advances (2020) Analytical Science Advances |
ISSN: | 2628-5452 |
DOI: | 10.1002/ansa.202000131 |
Popis: | The aim of this study was to assess the interlaboratory reproducibility of ultra‐high performance supercritical fluid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry method for routine antidoping analyses. To do so, a set of 21 doping agents, spiked in urine and analyzed after dilute and shoot treatment, was used to assess the variability of their retention times between four different laboratories, all equipped with the same chromatographic system and with the same ultra‐high performance supercritical fluid chromatography stationary phase chemistry. The average relative standard deviations (RSD%) demonstrated a good reproducibility of the retention times for 19 out of 21 analytes, with RSD% values below 3.0%. Only for two substances, namely fenbutrazate and niketamide, the retention was not repeatable between laboratories, with RSD% of approximately 15% in both cases. This behaviour was associated with (a) the low organic modifier percentage (around 2‐4%) in the mobile phase at the corresponding retention times, and (b) the influence of the system volume on poorly retained analytes. An analysis on seven “blind” urines was subsequently carried out in the same four laboratories. In these blind samples, either one, two, or none of the 21 doping agents previously analyzed were present at an unknown concentration. Each laboratory had to perform the identification of the compounds in the samples and estimate their concentrations. All laboratories assigned all target analytes correctly in all blind urine samples and provide a comparable estimation of their concentrations. |
Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
Externí odkaz: |