2019
DOI: 10.1007/s00216-018-01569-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Urinary hydroxypyrene determination for biomonitoring of firefighters deployed at the Fort McMurray wildfire: an inter-laboratory method comparison

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
23
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
2
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The GC-MS method adopted by the McMaster University group had a lower limit of detection (LoD) and somewhat higher estimates than the University of Calgary group using an LC-MS/MS method. Concentrations were above the limit of detection (LoD) for 44/62 (71.0%) by LC-MS/MS and 61/62 (98.4%) by GC-MS but there was good mutual agreement between the methods, giving credibility to the analysis reported here (Gill et al ., 2019). Subsequent analysis of urine samples was performed by LC-MS/MS due to its faster analysis times that avoid the need for complicated sample handling.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 68%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The GC-MS method adopted by the McMaster University group had a lower limit of detection (LoD) and somewhat higher estimates than the University of Calgary group using an LC-MS/MS method. Concentrations were above the limit of detection (LoD) for 44/62 (71.0%) by LC-MS/MS and 61/62 (98.4%) by GC-MS but there was good mutual agreement between the methods, giving credibility to the analysis reported here (Gill et al ., 2019). Subsequent analysis of urine samples was performed by LC-MS/MS due to its faster analysis times that avoid the need for complicated sample handling.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 68%
“…The comparison of laboratory methods for the estimation of 1-HP is reported elsewhere (Gill et al ., 2019). The GC-MS method adopted by the McMaster University group had a lower limit of detection (LoD) and somewhat higher estimates than the University of Calgary group using an LC-MS/MS method.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The HPLC-FLD method is set-up to process 60 samples per day per analyst (including blanks and QC samples) making it an ideal throughput process to handle large volumes of HAPIN trial samples. The LLE method resulted in an accuracy that ranged from 101% to 128% which was similar or even better compared to SPE methodology used in previous studies [22] , [28] , [29] , [36] , [37] . The inter-day and intra-day precision of pooled urine matrix spike was under 5% RSD in HPLC-FLD method which was comparable with LC-MSMS and GC-HRMS techniques [22] , [37] .…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 56%
“…As the most popular GC-API technique, a number of publications have recently appeared that demonstrate its advantages over EI or CI. Analysis of hydroxypyrene (a PAH metabolite in human urine) using GC-APCI showed lower detection limits and a wider linear range than LC-MS/MS [52]. In the same vein, GC-APCI analysis resulted in >10-fold lower method detection limits for halogenated dioxins and furans in sediments, fish and fire debris as well as 9-nitrophenanthrene and 3-nitrophenanthrene in PM 2.5, as compared to using EI.…”
Section: Atmospheric Pressure Chemical Ionization (Apci)mentioning
confidence: 97%