ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2023
Theoretical and practical comparison of RPLC and RPLC × RPLC: how to consider dilution effects and sensitivity in addition to separation power?
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improving the Accuracy of Predictive 2D-LC Optimization Strategies: Incorporation of Simulated Elution Profiles to Account for Injection Band Broadening in Online Comprehensive Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography.Analytical chemistry · 2024Article
- An improved workflow for the development of MS-compatible liquid chromatography assay purity and purification methods by using automated LC Screening instrumentation and in silico modeling.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2024Article
- Reversed HILIC Gradient: A Powerful Strategy for On-Line Comprehensive 2D-LC.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this work was to provide an unbiased comparison of one-dimensional reversed-phase liquid chromatography (1D-RPLC) and comprehensive two-dimensional RPLC (RPLC × RPLC), through calculations and experimental verifications. For this purpose, various quality descriptors were evaluated, including peak capacity, analysis time, dilution factor, number of runs in the second dimension, and injection volume. The same strategy was applied to small pharmaceuticals and peptides. Whatever the analysis time between 30 and 200 min, short columns of only 30 × 2.1 mm packed with sub-2-µm particles should be selected in both dimensions of the 2D-LC setup to obtain the best compromise in terms of peak capacity and sensitivity. The peak capacity in RPLC × RPLC vs. RPLC was significantly improved for analysis times beyond 5 min. However, extra-column volume located after the second-dimension column was found to be particularly critical for peptides, and up to 50% lower peak capacity was observed with MS vs. UV detection. Contrary to common belief, higher dilution is not always observed in RPLC × RPLC. With adequate analytical conditions, better sensitivity (in theory fivefold and in practice three- to fivefold) could be achieved in RPLC × RPLC compared to 1D-RPLC, regardless of the analysis time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36323885What 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.