In this work we compared the results of the GSNO determination in human plasma by two independent methods. The first method is based on the pre-column derivatization of GSNO thiolic part by p-hydroxymercury benzoate (PHMB) and followed by the determination of GS-PHMB product by reversed phase chromatography coupled to chemical vapour generation atomic fluorescence spectrometry (RPC-CVGAFS). The second method is based on RPC separation of GSNO from interfering compounds and the post-column, on-line enzymatic hydrolysis of GSNO by commercial γ-glutamyl transferase (GGT) and fluorescence detection. Endogenous GSNO was determined only in plasma from blood sampled by syringe (not by Vacutainers®) and ranged between 157 and 257 nM on the basis of RPC-CVGAFS method, and between 90 and 225 nM by RPC-FD method. There was a good correlation between the two methods (slope = 1.06 ± 0.09, R2 = 0.9543). RPC-CVGAFS method based on PHMB derivatization determined a GSNO concentration 60 ± 20 nM in excess with respect to RPC-FD method. Sampling issues connected with common blood sampling procedures like venipuncture and sampling in syringe or Vacutainers® still introduce in GSNO analysis unknown factors, which require further investigations.

Determination of S-nitrosoglutathione in plasma: comparison of two methods.

POMPELLA, ALFONSO;PAOLICCHI, ALDO;D'ULIVO, ALESSANDRO
2010

Abstract

In this work we compared the results of the GSNO determination in human plasma by two independent methods. The first method is based on the pre-column derivatization of GSNO thiolic part by p-hydroxymercury benzoate (PHMB) and followed by the determination of GS-PHMB product by reversed phase chromatography coupled to chemical vapour generation atomic fluorescence spectrometry (RPC-CVGAFS). The second method is based on RPC separation of GSNO from interfering compounds and the post-column, on-line enzymatic hydrolysis of GSNO by commercial γ-glutamyl transferase (GGT) and fluorescence detection. Endogenous GSNO was determined only in plasma from blood sampled by syringe (not by Vacutainers®) and ranged between 157 and 257 nM on the basis of RPC-CVGAFS method, and between 90 and 225 nM by RPC-FD method. There was a good correlation between the two methods (slope = 1.06 ± 0.09, R2 = 0.9543). RPC-CVGAFS method based on PHMB derivatization determined a GSNO concentration 60 ± 20 nM in excess with respect to RPC-FD method. Sampling issues connected with common blood sampling procedures like venipuncture and sampling in syringe or Vacutainers® still introduce in GSNO analysis unknown factors, which require further investigations.
Bramanti, E; Angeli, V; Mester, Z; Pompella, Alfonso; Paolicchi, Aldo; D'Ulivo, Alessandro
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11568/237849
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 5
  • Scopus 20
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 21
social impact