Clinical Chemistry AACC Online Job Center
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Clinical Chemistry 28: 462-466, 1982;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an electronic Letter to
the Editor about this paper
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Koteel, P.
Right arrow Articles by Gadsden, R. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Koteel, P.
Right arrow Articles by Gadsden, R. H.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 28, 462-466, Copyright © 1982 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Sample preparation and liquid-chromatographic analysis for tricyclic antidepressants in serum

P Koteel, RE Mullins and RH Gadsden

We report two separate sample-preparation procedures and a "high- pressure" liquid-chromatographic method for quantitating nine tricyclic antidepressant drugs: trimipramine, doxepin, amitriptyline, imipramine, desmethyldoxepin, nortriptyline, desipramine, maprotiline, and protriptyline. The drugs are extracted from 1 mL of serum by a single manual hexane extraction or by using DuPont's PREP I Automated Sample Processor. The drugs from either process are chromatographed on a mu- Bondapak-CN column with a mobile phase of acetonitrile/methanol/Na2HPO4, 5 mmol/L (60/15/25 by vol), pH 7.0, at a flow rate of 2.0 mL/min. Absorbance at 254 nm is linear with drug concentration from 25 to 1000 mg/L for each drug. With the manual extraction procedure the detection limit was 10 mg/L, absolute recovery 20-44%, within-run precision (CV) 10.1%, and run-to-run precision 11.1%. The performance of automated sample extraction was better, with a detection limit of 5 mg/l, absolute recovery 72-97%, within-run precision 6.1%, and run-to-run precision 6.6%.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1982 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.