Comparison of tissue homogenate analytical results with and without standard addition.
Comparison of tissue homogenate analytical results with and without standard addition.
复制标题
添加和不添加标准品的组织匀浆分析结果的比较。
DOI：
10.1093/anatox/35.3.179
复制
发表时间：
2011
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
A. Jenkins
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Juhascik;A. Jenkins
标准加入法（SA）有时被用作法医毒理学的分析工具。建议用于组织或分解样本等困难基质，其中药物的准确定量可能存在问题。然而，额外的制备时间和增加使用的标本可能会限制其普遍适用性。在这项研究中，作者将SA与直接提取（DE）和定量对照血液校准曲线进行了比较，以评估定量结果是否存在显著差异。22个尸检案件进行了分析药物，如可卡因和代谢物，阿片类药物，抗抑郁药固相萃取，然后气相色谱-质谱法在选定的离子监测模式。双尾、同方差Student t检验证明两组数据无统计学差异（p = 0.81）。此外，SA更可能表现出非线性（r（2）< 0.98）。
Standard addition (SA) has occasionally been utilized as an analytical tool in forensic toxicology. It is recommended for difficult matrices such as tissue or decomposed specimens in which the accurate quantitation of drug may be problematic. However, the additional preparation time and increased use of specimen may limit its general applicability. In this study, the authors compared SA with direct extraction (DE) and quantitation against a blood calibration curve to assess whether the quantitative results were significantly different. Twenty-two postmortem cases were assayed for drugs such as cocaine and metabolites, opioids, and antidepressants by solid-phase extraction followed by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry operated in the selected ion monitoring mode. A two-tailed, homoscedastic Student's t-test demonstrated that the two sets of data were not statistically different (p = 0.81). In addition, SAs were more likely to demonstrate nonlinearity (r(2) < 0.98).