Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 12705380

Electrochemically controlled solid-phase microextraction and preconcentration using polypyrrole coated microarray electrodes in a flow system.

Abstract

Polypyrrole coated microarray electrodes have been used for electrochemically controlled solid-phase microextraction and preconcentration on individually addressable gold microband electrodes. In this study, a flow of analyte solution was maintained over the band electrodes by positioning a capillary in a vertical position over the electrode array during both the extraction and the detection of the desorbed compounds. This experimental set-up was used to evaluate the possibilities of using electrochemically controlled solid-phase microextraction with conducting polymers as a preconcentration step in miniaturised flow systems. The performance of the polymer, which was prepared by electrochemical polymerisation using a solution of 0.05 M pyrrole and 0.1 M LiClO4, was investigated using chloride as a model analyte employing different extraction times and analyte concentrations. It was found that significant preconcentration was possible using extraction times of only a few minutes and that a good linearity between the extraction time and detection response was present both for mM and microM chloride concentrations. Compared to a recent study (Liljegren et al., Analyst, 2002, 127, 591-597), using a more traditional solid-phase microextraction technique under electrochemical control, the preconcentration factor could be increased by a factor of about 210 by using the present flow system based approach. This increase in the preconcentration factor can be explained by the significant decrease in the desorption volume (i.e. reduced dilution of the desorbed analyte) associated with the use of the present flow system. With the present approach, the detection limit for the model analyte chloride could be decreased from 10 microM to 625 nM employing an extraction time of 180 s.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Gustav Liljegren, Leif Nyholm. 2003. Electrochemically controlled solid-phase microextraction and preconcentration using polypyrrole coated microarray electrodes in a flow system.. https://doi.org/10.1039/b211398h

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗