4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Urease-immobilized magnetic microparticles in urine sample preparation for metabolomic analysis by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
Volume 1605, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2019.07.009

Keywords

Urine sample preparation; Immobilized urease; GC-MS; Metabolomics

Funding

  1. Czech Science Foundation [18-12204S]
  2. NPU I [LO1304]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Urea, as an end product of protein metabolism and an abundant polar compound, significantly complicates the metabolomic analysis of urine by GC-MS. We developed a sample preparation method removing urea from urine samples prior the GC-MS analysis. The method based on urease immobilized on magnetic microparticles was compared with the others that are conventionally used (liquid-liquid extraction, free urease protocol), and samples without any treatment. To study the impact of sample preparation approaches on the quality of analytical data, we employed comprehensive metabolomic analysis (using both GC-MS and LC-MS/MS platforms) of standard material based on human urine. Multivariate statistical analysis has shown that immobilized urease treatment provides similar results to a free urease approach. However, significant alterations in the profiles of metabolites were observed in the samples without any treatment and after the extraction. Compared to other approaches that were tested, the immobilization of urease on microparticles reduces both the number of artifacts and the variability of the metabolites (average CV of extraction 19.7%, no treatment 11.4%, free urease 5.0%, and immobilized urease 2.5%). The method that was developed was applied in a GC-MS metabolomic experiment of glutaric aciduria type I, where both known diagnostically important biomarkers and unknowns, as the most discriminating compounds, were found. (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available