In this study we compare on-line gel permeation chromatography (GPC) electrospray ionization (ESI) time-of-flight (TOF) mass spectrometry (MS) to automated GPC matrix assisted laser desorption ionization (MALDI) TOF MS for poly (dimethylsiloxane) (PDMS) analysis. Average mass values for a hydroxyl-terminated PDMS (OH-PDMS) sample were obtained and compared to traditional GPC that was calibrated with narrow polystyrene standards, by direct ESI and MALDI MS analysis, by a summation of mass spectra of all GPC fractions, and also by the recalibration method determined by both mass spectrometric methods. Quantitatively, the difference noted here between these hyphenated techniques is that GPC-ESI-TOF MS effectively reports the low-mass oligomers and underestimates the high-mass oligomers, while GPC-MALDI-TOF MS effectively reports the high-mass oligomers and underestimates the low-mass oligomers. In the GPC-ESI-TOF MS experiments, ion current suppression was observed in the high molecular weight region. The suppression effect was confirmed by repeatable sample runs and by injecting different PDMS samples. Higher chromatographic resolution was observed for GPC-ESI-TOF MS compared to GPC-MALDI-TOF MS. In fact, truly mono-disperse oligomers were observed in the low molecular weight range from GPC-ESI MS experiments. (J

No abstract

The development of soft ionization methods such as matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI), electrospray ionization (ESI) and secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS) has led to an increased use of mass spectrometry in characterizing technical (synthetic) polymers. In this paper, we compare the relative performance of these three ionization methods for characterizing the molecular weights, polydispersities and quantification of relative amounts of polymer components in mixtures. Two polymers used in biomaterials, poly(dimethylsiloxane) and poly(ethylene glycol), are employed as the model polymer systems for our survey because of their well-defined molecular weights and importance as surfactants in biomaterials and because many of their surface and solutionphase properties are well understood. Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization can be used to examine the surface and bulk composition of biomaterials, whereas secondary ion mass spectrometry is used for examining monolayer and submonolayer coverage of polymers on surfaces and electrospray ionization is suited for examination of extractables from biomaterials. Secondary ion mass spectrometry and electrospray show discriminate behavior against ionization of higher molecular weight oligomers, especially of poly(dimethylsiloxane). Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization appears to exhibit the best performance for reliable molecular weight determination at higher masses and polydispersity characterization as well as for quantification of components in polymer mixtures. The results are discussed within the context of the ionization mechanisms by which each soft ionization technique operates and by the attributes of the mass analyzers (time-of-flight and Fourier transform mass spectrometers) employed.

No abstract

The surface chemistry and topography of cast-molded Etafilcon-A and doubled-sided lathed Etafilcon-A soft contact lenses were determined to be significantly different. The variations in surface chemical and morphologic structure between the two lenses were the result of contact lens manufacturing methods. The surface of the cast-molded Etafilcon-A had a consistently less rough surface compared to the doubled sided lathed Etafilcon-A as determined by atomic force microscopy. The surface of the doubled sided lathed Etafilcon-A contained primarily silicone and wax contamination in addition to minute amounts of HEMA. The cast-molded Etafilcon-A had an elemental and chemical content which was consistent with the polymer stoichiometry. Contact angle wettability profiles revealed inherent wettability differences between the two lenses types. The cast-molded Etafilcon-A had an inherently greater water wettability, polarity, and critical surface tension. This means that these two lenses cannot be compared as similar or identical lens materials in terms of surface composition. The manufacturing method used to produce a soft contact lens directly determines the surface elemental and chemical structure as well as the morphology of the finished lens material. These results suggest possible differences in the clinical comfort, spoilage, and lubricity felt during patient wear.