Comparison of ultraviolet detection, evaporative light scattering detection and charged aerosol detection methods for liquid-chromatographic determination of anti-diabetic drugs

Jia Shaodong, Won Jun Lee, Ji Won Ee, Jeong Hill Park, Sung Won Kwon, Jeongmi Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

56 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Recently, charged aerosol detection (CAD), a new kind of universal detection method, has been widely employed in the HPLC system. In the present study, four kinds of anti-diabetic drug standards, glipizide, gliclazide, glibenclamide and glimepiride were determined by ultraviolet (UV) detection, evaporative light scattering detection (ELSD) and the aforementioned CAD. The results were compared with reference to linearity, accuracy, precision and limit of detection (LOD). All of the experiments were performed on a reverse phase column with water and acetonitrile as the mobile phase. Separations were achieved under the same chromatographic conditions for each detection method. As a result, CAD generated nearly uniform responses compared with UV detection and ELSD. It showed the best accuracy and LOD among 3 detectors and had similar precision with UV detection at higher concentrations while UV detection showed a better precision at lower concentrations than did CAD or ELSD. The LOD of CAD, in fact, can be up to two times higher than that of ELSD. The UV and ELSD linearity was satisfactory at R2 > 0.99, though in the case of CAD, a log-log transformation was needed. The proposed methods were also applied to the real anti-diabetic drugs and diabetes-related dietary supplements.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)973-978
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis
Volume51
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 11 2010

Fingerprint

Aerosols
Light scattering
Light
Liquids
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Limit of Detection
glimepiride
Dietary supplements
Glipizide
Gliclazide
Glyburide
Ultraviolet Rays
Medical problems
Dietary Supplements
High Pressure Liquid Chromatography
Detectors
Water
Experiments

Keywords

  • CAD
  • ELSD
  • Glibenclamide
  • Gliclazide
  • Glimepiride
  • Glipizide
  • HPLC
  • Pharmaceutical analysis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Analytical Chemistry
  • Drug Discovery
  • Pharmaceutical Science
  • Spectroscopy
  • Clinical Biochemistry

Cite this

Comparison of ultraviolet detection, evaporative light scattering detection and charged aerosol detection methods for liquid-chromatographic determination of anti-diabetic drugs. / Shaodong, Jia; Lee, Won Jun; Ee, Ji Won; Park, Jeong Hill; Kwon, Sung Won; Lee, Jeongmi.

In: Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis, Vol. 51, No. 4, 11.03.2010, p. 973-978.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{80a00c54fb7449f494a43806366afef2,
title = "Comparison of ultraviolet detection, evaporative light scattering detection and charged aerosol detection methods for liquid-chromatographic determination of anti-diabetic drugs",
abstract = "Recently, charged aerosol detection (CAD), a new kind of universal detection method, has been widely employed in the HPLC system. In the present study, four kinds of anti-diabetic drug standards, glipizide, gliclazide, glibenclamide and glimepiride were determined by ultraviolet (UV) detection, evaporative light scattering detection (ELSD) and the aforementioned CAD. The results were compared with reference to linearity, accuracy, precision and limit of detection (LOD). All of the experiments were performed on a reverse phase column with water and acetonitrile as the mobile phase. Separations were achieved under the same chromatographic conditions for each detection method. As a result, CAD generated nearly uniform responses compared with UV detection and ELSD. It showed the best accuracy and LOD among 3 detectors and had similar precision with UV detection at higher concentrations while UV detection showed a better precision at lower concentrations than did CAD or ELSD. The LOD of CAD, in fact, can be up to two times higher than that of ELSD. The UV and ELSD linearity was satisfactory at R2 > 0.99, though in the case of CAD, a log-log transformation was needed. The proposed methods were also applied to the real anti-diabetic drugs and diabetes-related dietary supplements.",
keywords = "CAD, ELSD, Glibenclamide, Gliclazide, Glimepiride, Glipizide, HPLC, Pharmaceutical analysis",
author = "Jia Shaodong and Lee, {Won Jun} and Ee, {Ji Won} and Park, {Jeong Hill} and Kwon, {Sung Won} and Jeongmi Lee",
year = "2010",
month = "3",
day = "11",
doi = "10.1016/j.jpba.2009.10.019",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "51",
pages = "973--978",
journal = "Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis",
issn = "0731-7085",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of ultraviolet detection, evaporative light scattering detection and charged aerosol detection methods for liquid-chromatographic determination of anti-diabetic drugs

AU - Shaodong, Jia

AU - Lee, Won Jun

AU - Ee, Ji Won

AU - Park, Jeong Hill

AU - Kwon, Sung Won

AU - Lee, Jeongmi

PY - 2010/3/11

Y1 - 2010/3/11

N2 - Recently, charged aerosol detection (CAD), a new kind of universal detection method, has been widely employed in the HPLC system. In the present study, four kinds of anti-diabetic drug standards, glipizide, gliclazide, glibenclamide and glimepiride were determined by ultraviolet (UV) detection, evaporative light scattering detection (ELSD) and the aforementioned CAD. The results were compared with reference to linearity, accuracy, precision and limit of detection (LOD). All of the experiments were performed on a reverse phase column with water and acetonitrile as the mobile phase. Separations were achieved under the same chromatographic conditions for each detection method. As a result, CAD generated nearly uniform responses compared with UV detection and ELSD. It showed the best accuracy and LOD among 3 detectors and had similar precision with UV detection at higher concentrations while UV detection showed a better precision at lower concentrations than did CAD or ELSD. The LOD of CAD, in fact, can be up to two times higher than that of ELSD. The UV and ELSD linearity was satisfactory at R2 > 0.99, though in the case of CAD, a log-log transformation was needed. The proposed methods were also applied to the real anti-diabetic drugs and diabetes-related dietary supplements.

AB - Recently, charged aerosol detection (CAD), a new kind of universal detection method, has been widely employed in the HPLC system. In the present study, four kinds of anti-diabetic drug standards, glipizide, gliclazide, glibenclamide and glimepiride were determined by ultraviolet (UV) detection, evaporative light scattering detection (ELSD) and the aforementioned CAD. The results were compared with reference to linearity, accuracy, precision and limit of detection (LOD). All of the experiments were performed on a reverse phase column with water and acetonitrile as the mobile phase. Separations were achieved under the same chromatographic conditions for each detection method. As a result, CAD generated nearly uniform responses compared with UV detection and ELSD. It showed the best accuracy and LOD among 3 detectors and had similar precision with UV detection at higher concentrations while UV detection showed a better precision at lower concentrations than did CAD or ELSD. The LOD of CAD, in fact, can be up to two times higher than that of ELSD. The UV and ELSD linearity was satisfactory at R2 > 0.99, though in the case of CAD, a log-log transformation was needed. The proposed methods were also applied to the real anti-diabetic drugs and diabetes-related dietary supplements.

KW - CAD

KW - ELSD

KW - Glibenclamide

KW - Gliclazide

KW - Glimepiride

KW - Glipizide

KW - HPLC

KW - Pharmaceutical analysis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=72149111111&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=72149111111&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpba.2009.10.019

DO - 10.1016/j.jpba.2009.10.019

M3 - Article

C2 - 20004074

AN - SCOPUS:72149111111

VL - 51

SP - 973

EP - 978

JO - Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis

JF - Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis

SN - 0731-7085

IS - 4

ER -