Systematic evaluation of matrix effects in supercritical fluid chromatography versus liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry for biological samples

Supercritical fluid chromatography – Mass spectrometry: Recent evolution and current trends

“…The conclusions reached by both authors were similar, clearly stating that signal suppression is the major type of ME in SFC for urine [37]. Moreover, SFC has proved to give less ME than RPLC in all experiments with urine samples [37]. This statement is further confirmed in other papers, where ME was found to be quite low in SFC-MS conditions [38,44,45].…”

“…Since the retention mechanism in SFC on polar stationary phases (mostly polar interactions) is orthogonal to LC (mainly hydrophobic interactions), coelution of investigated compounds and substances contained within the matrix may be very different. Therefore, UHPSFC-ESI-MS(/MS) can be considered as a useful strategy to minimize or at least modify the impact of ME, in comparison with UHPLC-ESI-MS(/MS) [37].…”

“…In RPLC, both types of MEs (ion suppression and enhancement) co-exist, depending on the investigated analyte [36]. A second paper [37] correlated MEs obtained in RPLC and SFC using two different sample preparation methodologies (non-selective and selective), and the Matuszewski's approach was used as the ME evaluation. The conclusions reached by both authors were similar, clearly stating that signal suppression is the major type of ME in SFC for urine [37].…”

“…A second paper [37] correlated MEs obtained in RPLC and SFC using two different sample preparation methodologies (non-selective and selective), and the Matuszewski's approach was used as the ME evaluation. The conclusions reached by both authors were similar, clearly stating that signal suppression is the major type of ME in SFC for urine [37]. Moreover, SFC has proved to give less ME than RPLC in all experiments with urine samples [37].…”

“…While using plasma, however, the situation seems to be different. Indeed, the ME generated by plasma for around 40 representative drugs in SFC and RPLC [37] gave unexpected results. Higher signal suppression was observed in RPLC vs. SFC with the selective sample preparation methodology (solid phase extraction, SPE).…”