Sample preparation analytical equipment

Samples/ matrix Equipment/sample preparation Analyte Detection limits References... 

For the determination of trace metals in biological materials, in addition to Good Laboratory Practice further particularities have to be respected because the metal concentration in the matrix is extremely low. The most important disturbances are caused by contamination. The falsification of the results can be so enormous that these become nonsensical. Sources of contamination include the utensils used in sample preparation, all equipment having contact with the samples in the analytical procedure, water, reagents, and components in the environment. Because of the low metal content in the samples, instability of the solutions and matrix effects play an important role. Therefore standards and reference materials as well as the analytical procedure have to meet extremely high requirements [35,36]. 

Minerals generally present difficult problems in chemical analysis, and these problems grow more serious when the elements being determined are as difficult to separate as are those named above. The time and effort that x-ray emission spectrography can save are therefore great, but there are obstacles to be surmounted. Among these are (1) Absorption and enhancement effects are often serious. (2) The element of interest may be present at low concentration in a matrix that is unknown and variable. (3) Satisfactory standards are not always easy to obtain. (4) Simple equipment sometimes does not resolve important analytical lines- completely. (5) Sample preparation and particle size often influence the intensities of analytical lines Class II deviations (7.8) can be particularly serious with minerals. 

Solubilizing all or part of a sample matrix by contacting with liquids is one of the most widely used sample preparation techniques for gases, vapors, liquids or solids. Additional selectivity is possible by distributing the sample between pairs of immiscible liquids in which the analyte and its matrix have different solubilities. Equipment requirements are generally very simple for solvent extraction techniques. Table 8.2 [4,10], and solutions are easy to manipulate, convenient to inject into chromatographic instruments, and even small volumes of liquids can be measured accurately. Solids can be recovered from volatile solvents by evaporation. Since relatively large solvent volumes are used in most extraction procedures, solvent impurities, contaminants, etc., are always a common cause for concern [65,66]. 

The European Molecular Biology Laboratory s (EMBL s) offers a well-equipped pro-teomics laboratory in its facilities at the Proteomics Visitor Facility (Heidelberg, Germany). The services in MB concern protein isolation, imaging, and robotics sample preparation, supported by some other analytical facilities. 

SW-846 Method Water/ Wastewater Method Analytes Primary Equipment Sample Preparation ... 

A review of sample preparation techniques written recently by Smith (2003) purports that derivatization is not very useful and that with advances in separation techniques or by using a different analytical technique, such as HPLG, derivatization can be avoided. While a laboratory will examine almost any alternative to avoid derivatization according to Smith (2003), switching equipment can be prohibitively expensive, and so derivatization certainly still has an important role in most laboratories. 

An impurities analytical procedure should be described adequately so that any qualified analyst can readily reproduce the method. The description should include the scientific principle behind the procedure. A list of reagents and equipment, for example, instrument type, detector, column type, and dimensions, should be included. Equipment parameters, for example, flow rate, temperatures, run time, and wavelength settings, should be specified. How the analytical procedure is carried out, including the standard and sample preparations, the calculation formulae, and how to report results, should be described. A representative chromatogram with labeled peak(s) should be included in the procedure. 

The information in this chapter applies specifically to the first element sample preparation. The sample preparation steps are usually the most tedious and labor-intensive part of an analysis. By automating the sample preparation, a significant improvement in efficiency can be achieved. It is important to make sure that (1) suitable instrument qualification has been concluded successfully before initiation of automated sample preparation validation [2], (2) the operational reliability of the automated workstation is acceptable, (3) the analyte measurement procedure has been optimized (e.g., LC run conditions), and (4) appropriate training in use of the instrument has been provided to the operator(s). The equipment used to perform automated sample preparation can be purchased as off-the-shelf units that are precustomized, or it can be built by the laboratory in conjunction with a vendor (custom-designed system). Off-the-shelf workstations for fully automated dissolution testing, automated assay, and content uniformity testing are available from a variety of suppliers, such as Zymark (www.zymark.com) and Sotax (www.sotax.com). These workstations are very well represented in the pharmaceutical industry and are all based on the same functional requirements and basic principles. 

Analytical practitioners place great faith in the readings and outputs from their instruments. When unexpected or out of specification results occur, the initial suspicion often falls on the sample, the preparation technique or the analytical standard employed. Rarely is the equipment questioned. Indeed, the whole underpinning of method validation assumes that the analytical equipment used to acquire the experimental data is operating correctly and reliably. 

The good recoveries reported above by some earlier workers in SFE clearly demonstrate the feasibility and comparative accuracy of SFE as a sample preparation technique for a variety of analytes and matrices. However, the question of the "robustness" of SFE as an analytical tool easily used on a routine basis by chemists throughout the analytical community remains to be answered. What is the expected variability of results for any given application and how much user interaction is required to maintain functional equipment sample after sample Such information - precision and mean-time-between-failures (or mean-time-between-maintenance) - has not been routinely reported in published literature since the emphasis has heretofore been on initial feasibility experiments. 

An underlying assumption in these discussions is that SFE is a viable alternative for sample preparation procedures for a significant number of samples - even though equipment more sophisticated than traditional laboratory glassware is necessary. For example, SFE systems can be operated at temperatures up to 150 C and pressures to 600 bar using a variety of fluids. The unique characteristics of supercritical fluids which make them so attractive as solvents have been discussed fully on many occasions elsewhere (15-17) a similar discussion is outside the scope of this paper. However, in the next section we will briefly 1. explore the use of supercritical fluids from the perspective of potentially enhanced robustness and 2. outline considerations which are typically considered prior to analytical methods development and which should be employed for SFE as for any other technique. 

There are several other factors that are important when it comes to the selection of equipment in a measurement process. These parameters are items 7 to 13 in Table 1.2. They may be more relevant in sample preparation than in analysis. As mentioned before, very often the bottleneck is the sample preparation rather than the analysis. The former tends to be slower consequently, both measurement speed and sample throughput are determined by the discrete steps within the sample preparation. Modern analytical instruments tend to have a high degree of automation in terms of autoinjectors, autosamplers, and automated control/data acquisition. On the other hand, many sample preparation methods continue to be labor-intensive, requiring manual intervention. This prolongs analysis time and introduces random/systematic errors. 

When choosing instrumentation to place within the isolators, one should consider modularized instmmentation. By using modular instrumentation, parts of the instrument that do not have to be in direct contact with the sample can be located outside of the isolator. The benefits of this are twofold. The first benefit is that, by only placing the instrument modules that need to be in contact with the sample inside the isolator, one is effectively freeing up space in the interior of the isolator. This space can be utilized for additional analytical equipment or sample preparation. The second benefit is that, if the equipment malfunctions, you may only have to replace one module rather than the entire instrument. 

Whenever possible, a background sample of similar composition as the authentic sample is collected. For background sampling, the same type of sample collection equipment and techniques are applied as that used while collecting the authentic sample(s). Representative background samples will help to determine whether there are matrix effects, which may interfere in the sample preparation and analysis. Background and blank samples are required to determine whether the environment, sampling equipment, sample preparation, and analysis procedures alter the analytes of interest in the sample or interfere with the analysis. 

---