Matrix effects recovery analysis

The recovery experiment carried out for this assay resembles somehow the sum of two potential effects The loss of compound during the sample preparation process (in this case on-line extraction) and a potential matrix effect during sample analysis. However, since an online sample clean up procedure is used here, these two potential effects cannot be separated in the usual way (One experiment would be the comparison of a processed spiked plasma sample with a blank plasma sample spiked post sample processing in order to determine the recovery of the sample preparation step. In a second experiment, again a processed blank plasma sample would be spiked post processing and the result would be compared with the response of a spiked solvent sample in order to reveal a potential matrix effect during analysis). 

In trace organic analysis there is usually an extraction or clean-up process, rather than a sample dissolution. Here not only must the matrix effect be considered, but also the recovery yield of the extraction. Frequently an external spike standard is added, but there is often no way of knowing if the recovery of the spike standard matches the analyte in question. There is considerable evidence that the U S E P A method for VOA analysis (Minnich 1993) is subject to such error, as reported by Schumacher and Ward (7997). The analyst must always consider the possibility of such an error, especially when using CRMs to control methods that are applied in routine mode. 

Although SPME was applied initially for the analysis of relatively volatile environmental pollutants in waters, rapid developments have enabled SPME to be successfully applied for the analysis of pesticides in water, wine and more complex food samples such as honey, fruit juice and pears, vegetables and strawberries. With food samples, most analysts recognize the need for some sample pretreatment in order to minimize matrix effects. The matrix can affect the SPME efficiency, resulting in a reduced recovery of pesticides. The most common method is simply to dilute the sample or sample extract with water. Simpltcio and Boas comminuted pears in water prior to the determination of pesticides. Volante et al. extracted over 100 pesticides... 

The sample cleanup or analyte isolation step is often the major contributor to the overall systematic error of the analysis. In most cases, the variation in the recovery of the analyte, or class of analytes, determines the magnitude of the precision of the analysis. Thus, these steps must be adequately validated (J). Because check material is usually unavailable, fortifications to determine the effect of the matrix on recovery have to be made. This procedure generally requires prescreening a sample to determine an approximate analyte level so that the fortification level is not drastically greater than or less than the analyte level. Validation of the spiking or fortification procedure is sometimes necessary. 

Matrix effects play an important role in the accuracy and precision of a measurement. Sample preparation steps are often sensitive to the matrix. Matrix spikes are used to determine their effect on sample preparation and analysis. Matrix spiking is done by adding a known quantity of a component that is similar to the analyte but not present in the sample originally. The sample is then analyzed for the presence of the spiked material to evaluate the matrix effects. It is important to be certain that the extraction recovers most of the analytes, and spike recovery is usually required to be at least 70%. The matrix spike can be used to accept or reject a method. 

A recovery experiment is very useful not only in order to gain information on the sample preparation procedure, but also in order to reveal potential matrix effects on the analysis of the plasma samples (Schuhmacher... 

Several recommendations arose from the interlaboratory smdy to minimize analytical challenges and to ensure data quality. As discussed above, it is recommended that mass labelled PFCs be employed as internal standards [93, 97]. It should be noted, however, that some electrospray ionization suppression may still occur if these internal standards are used at high concentrations [97]. Matrix effects can also be minimized by employing matrix-matched calibration standards in lieu of solvent-based calibration standards [97]. Unfortunately, matrix-matched standards can be impractical when an appropriate clean matrix cannot be found [94]. Other quality assurance and quality control measures, such as spike and recovery analyses of an analyte added to the sample matrix, repetitive analysis of samples to determine precision and comparison of internal standard quantitation to quantitation via standard additions, are also useful in determining data quality [94]. 

A simple first strategy to recover residues for ELA is to try existing multiresidue methods, or to use solvents and solid-phase extraction media that have proven satisfactory in the first steps of more involved instrumental analyses. This approach makes the transition from instrumental methods to ELA easier for technical personnel, and it facilitates confirmatory instrumental analysis during method validation. The uncommon structure of avermectin antibiotics makes it very unlikely that the ELA would detect compounds other than an avermectin in multi-residue extracts, though this remains to be tested. The greater concerns are completeness of the extractions, efficiency and reproducibility of recoveries, and freedom from non-specific matrix effects and interference by solvents. 

Using electrochemical sensors and considering the sources of uncertainty given by Pan [2], viz. homogeneity, recovery, analysis blank, measurement standard, calibration, matrix effect and interferences, measuring instrument, and data processing, the main uncertainty sources i.e., the homogeneity and the matrix effect, are eliminated. 

HS-SPME is a very useful tool in polymer analysis and can be applied for absolute and semi-quantitative determination of the volatile content in polymers, for degradation studies, in the assessment of polymer durabihty, for screening tests and for quality control of recycled materials. For quantitative determination of volatiles in polymers, SPME can be combined with multiple headspace extraction to remove the matrix effects. If the hnearity of the MHS-SPME plot has been verified, the number of extractions can be reduced to two, which considerably reduces the total analysis time. Advantages of MHS-SPME compared to MAE are its higher sensitivity, the small sample amount required, solvent free nature and if an autosampler is used a low demand of labor time. In addition, if the matrix effects are absent, the recovery will always be 100%. This is valuable compared to other techniques for extracting volatiles in polymers in which the recovery should be calculated from the extraction of spiked samples, which are very difficult to produce in the case of polymeric materials. 

---