Off-line sample preparation by electrophoretic concentration using a micropipette and hydrogel

Wuethrich, Alain; Haddad, Paul R.; Quirino, Joselito P.

doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2014.10.006

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Wuethrich et al employed the use of an acrylamide based hydrogel for off-line electrophoretic preconcentration of anions in an aqueous sample. 27 CE LODs for the analysis of purified, drinking, and river water ranged from 0.001 to 0.133 μg/mL.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Capillary Electrophoresis

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Capillary Electrophoresis

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…On the other hand, the use of pressure assistance under counter‐EOF conditions requires carefully balancing the pressure and accurately determining the EOF velocity. There are alternatives to pressure assistance, for instance, capillary coatings and hydrogels could be used to modify the EOF and assist FASI in counter‐EOF of CZE. So, FASI should be continuously developed by using various strategies for wider applications.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field‐amplified sample injection combined with capillary electrophoresis for the simultaneous determination of five chlorophenols in water samples

Gao

Chen

et al. 2019

Electrophoresis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A sensitive method of CZE‐ultraviolet (UV) detection based on the on‐line preconcentration strategy of field‐amplified sample injection (FASI) was developed for the simultaneous determination of five kinds of chlorophenols (CPs) namely 4‐chlorophenol (4‐CP), 2‐chlorophenol (2‐CP), 2,4‐dichlorophenol (2,4‐DCP), 2,4,6‐trichlorophenol (2,4,6‐TCP), and 2,6‐dichlorophenol (2,6‐DCP) in water samples. Several parameters affecting CZE and FASI conditions were systematically investigated. Under the optimal conditions, sensitivity enhancement factors for 4‐CP, 2‐CP, 2,4‐DCP, 2,4,6‐TCP, and 2,6‐DCP were 9, 27, 35, 43, and 43 folds, respectively, compared with the direct CZE, and the baseline separation was achieved within 5 min. Then, the developed FASI‐CZE‐UV method was applied to tap and lake water samples for the five CPs determination. The LODs (S/N = 3) were 0.0018–0.019 µg/mL and 0.0089–0.029 µg/mL in tap water and lake water, respectively. The values of LOQs in tap water (0.006–0.0074 µg/mL) were much lower than the maximum permissible concentrations of 2,4,6‐TCP, 2,4‐DCP, and 2‐CP in drinking water stipulated by World Health Organization (WHO) namely 0.3, 0.04, and 0.01 µg/mL, respectively, and thereby the method was suitable to detect the CPs according to WHO guidelines. Furthermore, the method attained high recoveries in the range of 83.0–119.0% at three spiking levels of five CPs in the two types of water samples, with relative standard deviations of 0.37–8.58%. The developed method was proved to be a simple, sensitive, highly automated, and efficient alternative to CPs determination in real water samples.

show abstract

“…The EOF can impede on separation and is thus often suppressed. hydrogels [18][19][20]. In addition to EOF suppression, chemical modification of the microfluidic channels can also be applied to improve the method performance [21][22][23][24].…”

Section: Device Fabricationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A decade of microchip electrophoresis for clinical diagnostics – A review of 2008–2017

Wuethrich

Quirino

2019

Analytica Chimica Acta

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A core element in clinical diagnostics is the data interpretation obtained through the analysis of patient samples. To obtain relevant and reliable information, a methodological approach of sample preparation, separation, and detection is required. Traditionally, these steps are performed independently and stepwise. Microchip capillary electrophoresis (MCE) can provide rapid and high-resolution separation with the capability to integrate a streamlined and complete diagnostic workflow suitable for the point-of-care setting. Whilst standard clinical diagnostics methods normally require hours to days to retrieve specific patient data, MCE can reduce the time to minutes, hastening the delivery of treatment options for the patients. This review covers the advances in MCE for disease detection from 2008 to 2017. Miniaturised diagnostic approaches that required an electrophoretic separation step prior to the detection of the biological samples are reviewed. In the two main sections, the discussion is focused on the technical setup used to suit MCE for disease detection and on the strategies that have been applied to study various diseases. Throughout these discussions MCE is compared to other techniques to create context of the potential and challenges of MCE. A comprehensive table categorised based on the studied disease using MCE is provided. We also comment on future challenges that remain to be addressed.

show abstract

Off-line sample preparation by electrophoretic concentration using a micropipette and hydrogel

Cited by 10 publications

References 31 publications

Capillary Electrophoresis

Capillary Electrophoresis

Field‐amplified sample injection combined with capillary electrophoresis for the simultaneous determination of five chlorophenols in water samples

A decade of microchip electrophoresis for clinical diagnostics – A review of 2008–2017

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About