Determination of γ-hydroxybutyrate (GHB) and its precursors in blood and urine samples: A salting-out approach

Kankaanpää, Aino; Liukkonen, Raija; Ariniemi, Kari

doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2007.06.001

Cited by 24 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The method employed sodium chloride and reported >99.0% recovery. The extraction of γ ‐hydroxybutyrate (GHB) and its precursors in blood and urine samples was reported using a salting‐out approach (Kankaanpaa et al ., 2007). Most of the SALLE methods employed magnesium sulfate (Zhang et al ., 2009), ammonium sulfate (Rustum, 1989), sodium chloride (Yoshida et al ., 2004), calcium chloride, potassium carbonate, calcium sulfate and magnesium sulfate (Buratti et al ., 2006).…”

Section: Developments In Liquid–liquid Extraction Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

Recent advances in sample preparation techniques for effective bioanalytical methods

Kole

Venkatesh

Kotecha

et al. 2010

Biomedical Chromatography

324

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the recent developments in bioanalysis sample preparation techniques and gives an update on basic principles, theory, applications and possibilities for automation, and a comparative discussion on the advantages and limitation of each technique. Conventional liquid-liquid extraction (LLE), protein precipitation (PP) and solid-phase extraction (SPE) techniques are now been considered as methods of the past. The last decade has witnessed a rapid development of novel sample preparation techniques in bioanalysis. Developments in SPE techniques such as selective sorbents and in the overall approach to SPE, such as hybrid SPE and molecularly imprinted polymer SPE, have been addressed. Considerable literature has been published in the area of solid-phase micro-extraction and its different versions, e.g. stir bar sorptive extraction, and their application in the development of selective and sensitive bioanalytical methods. Techniques such as dispersive solid-phase extraction, disposable pipette extraction and micro-extraction by packed sorbent offer a variety of extraction phases and provide unique advantages to bioanalytical methods. On-line SPE utilizing column-switching techniques is rapidly gaining acceptance in bioanalytical applications. PP sample preparation techniques such as PP filter plates/tubes offer many advantages like removal of phospholipids and proteins in plasma/serum. Newer approaches to conventional LLE techniques (salting-out LLE) are also covered in this review article.

show abstract

Section: Developments In Liquid–liquid Extraction Techniquementioning

confidence: 99%

Recent advances in sample preparation techniques for effective bioanalytical methods

Kole

Venkatesh

Kotecha

et al. 2010

Biomedical Chromatography

324

168

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Salting-out was found to be suitable for this purpose, as was proven by method validation [172]. Advantages of salting-out with acetonitrile have been demonstrated, including the ease of biological sample clean-up as well as analyte enrichment.…”

Section: Salting-out Assisted Liquid-liquid Extraction (Salle)mentioning

confidence: 95%

A review of current trends and advances in modern bio-analytical methods: Chromatography and sample preparation

Nováková

Vlčková

2009

Analytica Chimica Acta

505

231

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…9 Furthermore, small amounts of GHB are endogenously present in humans; therefore, a reliable method should be able to distinguish between physiological concentrations and those resulting from exogenous administration. 10,[19][20][21] The GHB's cutoff value in the urine needed to confirm exogenous administration is critical for such methods to be reliable. In the literature, urine clinical sample cutoff values of 10 and 15 mcg/mL have been described because endogenous concentrations in the urine vary between 1 and 10 mcg/mL.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the literature, urine clinical sample cutoff values of 10 and 15 mcg/mL have been described because endogenous concentrations in the urine vary between 1 and 10 mcg/mL. 10,[20][21][22][23] In this study, the aim was to prospectively investigate the performance of the new DrugCheck GHB Single Test and the Viva-E GHB immunoassay in urine sample analysis in ED patients. The DrugCheck GHB Single Test can be used by ED staff at point-of-care for generating results within 10 minutes, whereas the Viva-E GHB immunoassay, generally used in hospital laboratory settings, is an attractive alternative that can be used to generate results within 15 minutes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospective Investigation of the Performance of 2 Gamma-Hydroxybutyric Acid Tests: DrugCheck GHB Single Test and Viva-E GHB Immunoassay

Smits¹,

Gresnigt

Groen

et al. 2020

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Gamma-hydroxybutyric acid (GHB) is a recreational drug with central nervous system depressing effects that is often abused. A urine GHB point-of-care test can be of great diagnostic value. The objective of this prospective study was to determine the performance of the new DrugCheck GHB Single Test and the Viva-E GHB immunoassay for urine samples in emergency department patients. Methods: Patients presented to the emergency department of the OLVG hospital in Amsterdam with a Glasgow Coma Scale score ,15 and potential drug of abuse intoxication were included in the study. Between June 2016 and October 2017, 375 patients were included. Using the DrugCheck GHB Single Test (Express Diagnostics Int'l, Blue Earth, MN) and the Viva-E GHB immunoassay (Siemens Healthineers, The Hague, the Netherlands), patients' urine samples were tested for GHB (cutoff for a positive result, 10 or 50 mcg/mL GHB). To ensure quality, the results obtained were compared with those generated using a validated gas chromatography method. The tests were considered reliable if specificity and sensitivity were both .90%. Possible cross-reactivity with ethanol was investigated by analyzing ethanol concentrations in patients' samples. Results: Seventy percentage of the included patients was men, and the median age was 34 years old. The DrugCheck GHB Single Test's specificity and sensitivity were 90.0% and 72.9%, respectively, and using 50 mcg/mL as a cutoff value, its specificity and sensitivity improved to 96.7% and 75.0%, respectively. Serum and urine ethanol levels in the false-positive group were significantly higher compared with those in the true-negative group. The specificity and sensitivity of the Viva-E GHB immunoassay (cutoff value of 50 mcg/mL and excluding samples with ethanol levels $2.0 g/L) were 99.4% and 93.5%, respectively. Conclusions: The DrugCheck GHB Single Test's specificity was sufficient, whereas its sensitivity was poor, making it unsuitable for use at point-of-care. Contrarily, using 50 mcg/mL as the cutoff value and excluding samples with ethanol levels $2.0 g/L, the Viva-E GHB immunoassay showed acceptable results to detect clinically relevant GHB intoxications.

show abstract

Determination of γ-hydroxybutyrate (GHB) and its precursors in blood and urine samples: A salting-out approach

Cited by 24 publications

References 30 publications

Recent advances in sample preparation techniques for effective bioanalytical methods

Recent advances in sample preparation techniques for effective bioanalytical methods

A review of current trends and advances in modern bio-analytical methods: Chromatography and sample preparation

Prospective Investigation of the Performance of 2 Gamma-Hydroxybutyric Acid Tests: DrugCheck GHB Single Test and Viva-E GHB Immunoassay

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About