2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2018.03.052
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantitative evaluation of the matrix effect in bioanalytical methods based on LC–MS: A comparison of two approaches

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Extraction efficiency and matrix effect were determined by comparison of plasma spiked with analytes pre-and post-extraction, in conjunction with neat mobile phase (40:60 0.1% formic acid in water: methanol) spiked with analytes. 24,25 For each condition, (preextraction, post-extraction and mobile phase), six replicates were prepared at QCL, QCM and QCH concentrations.…”
Section: Extraction Efficiency and Matrix Effectmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Extraction efficiency and matrix effect were determined by comparison of plasma spiked with analytes pre-and post-extraction, in conjunction with neat mobile phase (40:60 0.1% formic acid in water: methanol) spiked with analytes. 24,25 For each condition, (preextraction, post-extraction and mobile phase), six replicates were prepared at QCL, QCM and QCH concentrations.…”
Section: Extraction Efficiency and Matrix Effectmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Process efficiency and matrix effects: The total process efficiency (PE) was determined by comparing area counts of blank matrix fortified with low QC, and IS prior to sample processing were compared to area counts of "neat" sample containing low QC and IS in the elution solvent [18]. At least three replicates of three concentrations across the analytical measuring range were used for both sets.…”
Section: Qc Bias and Imprecisionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The potential impact of post mortem matrix-related effects on standard analytical methods and the interpretation of results are examples of issues relating to forensic toxicology (2), that is why, although the guide used as a reference for the validation of the qualitative method did not suggest the evaluation of the matrix effect, this parameter has been evaluated. Besides that, according to several authors (21)(22)(23), LC method coupled to the ESI ionization source suffers more influence of the matrix components. Table 3 shows the FMN obtained for the substances that presented CV% around 15, considered satisfactory.…”
Section: Matrix Effectmentioning
confidence: 99%