ArticleJournal of visualized experiments : JoVE2018
A Convenient Method for Extraction and Analysis with High-Pressure Liquid Chromatography of Catecholamine Neurotransmitters and Their Metabolites.
Article in Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cell-Effective Transition-State Analogue of PhenylethanolamineBiochemistry · 2023Article
- Is alumina suitable for solid phase extraction of catecholamines from brain tissue?Arhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The extraction and analysis of catecholamine neurotransmitters in biological fluids is of great importance in assessing nervous system function and related diseases, but their precise measurement is still a challenge. Many protocols have been described for neurotransmitter measurement by a variety of instruments, including high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC). However, there are shortcomings, such as complicated operation or hard-to-detect multiple targets, which cannot be avoided, and presently, the dominant analysis technique is still HPLC coupled with sensitive electrochemical or fluorimetric detection, due to its high sensitivity and good selectivity. Here, a detailed protocol is described for the pretreatment and detection of catecholamines with high pressure liquid chromatography with electrochemical detection (HPLC-ECD) in real urine samples of infants, using electrospun composite nanofibers composed of polymeric crown ether with polystyrene as adsorbent, also known as the packed-fiber solid phase extraction (PFSPE) method. We show how urine samples can be easily precleaned by a nanofiber-packed solid phase column, and how the analytes in the sample can be rapidly enriched, desorbed, and detected on an ECD system. PFSPE greatly simplifies the pretreatment procedures for biological samples, allowing for decreased time, expense, and reduction of the loss of targets. Overall, this work illustrates a simple and convenient protocol for solid-phase extraction coupled to an HPLC-ECD system for simultaneous determination of three monoamine neurotransmitters (norepinephrine (NE), epinephrine (E), dopamine (DA)) and two of their metabolites (3-methoxy-4-hydroxyphenylglycol (MHPG) and 3,4-dihydroxy-phenylacetic acid (DOPAC)) in infants' urine. The established protocol was applied to assess the differences of urinary catecholamines and their metabolites between high-risk infants with perinatal brain damage and healthy controls. Comparative analysis revealed a significant difference in urinary MHPG between the two groups, indicating that the catecholamine metabolites may be an important candidate marker for early diagnosis of cases at risk for brain damage in infants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.