ArticleJournal of chromatography. A2026
Comparison of ultrahigh- and low-pressure packing methods for preparation of 50 cm long capillary UHPLC columns.
Article in Journal of chromatography. A, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Interdependent variables including pressure, slurry concentration, and slurry solvent contribute to producing high-efficiency liquid chromatography columns by slurry packing. Most commonly, ultrahigh-pressure (over 2000 bar) slurry packing methods have been observed to generate the highest performing column packed beds. However, low-pressure packing (<200 bar) methods are also commonly used but have not been examined in depth or compared to ultrahigh-pressure packed columns for kinetic performance. In this work, we compare methods that employed low- (100 bar) or ultrahigh-pressures (2070 bar) to slurry pack 50 cm long × 75 µm inner diameter (i.d.) capillaries with 1.7 µm diameter ethylene-bridged hybrid (BEH) C18 particles. Both packing methods utilized a high slurry concentration, with low-pressure packing using a settled slurry (3 mm tall layer of particles in the bottom of a tube with slow stirring) and ultrahigh-pressure packing using a suspended (fast stirring to prevent settling) 200 mg/mL slurry. Columns were evaluated with isocratic separations of small molecules and gradient separations of a peptide standard mixture. Low-pressure packed columns saw an improvement in performance when sonication was used during packing. Low-pressure packed columns achieved a minimum reduced plate height as low as 1.18 and a peak capacity of 534 in <2 h, thus generating comparable separation performance to columns packed at ultrahigh-pressures. Similar column-to-column and run-to-run performance repeatability was also observed for both packing methods. The low-pressure packing technique provides a less technically demanding and more cost-effective approach for preparing high-efficiency capillary columns.
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.