| Literature DB >> 30719043 |
Walaa El-Alfy1, Omnia A Ismaiel1, Magda Y El-Mammli1, Abdalla Shalaby1.
Abstract
A simple RP-HPLC-PDA method for determination of atenolol (ATN) and trimetazidine (TMZ) in human urine and tablets has been developed. Analytes were separated on a Caltrex BI column (125× 4.0 mm, 5 μm) with 25mM potassium dihydrogen phosphate pH 3.3, methanol, and acetonitrile mobile phases. The PDA detector was operated at 210 nm for TMZ and 225 nm for ATN and the flow rate was 1.0 mL/ min. Linearity was obtained over a concentration range of (1.0-100 μg/mL) for both analytes in standard solutions and the method was successfully applied for determination of target analytes in their pharmaceutical tablets. Excellent linearity was also obtained over concentration ranges of (0.25-25 μg/mL) and (0.5-25 μg/mL) in human urine for TMZ and ATN, respectively. A simple liquid-liquid extraction was applied for urine sample clean-up and a gradient method was used for chromatographic separation. The lower limit of quantitation (LOQ) was 0.99 and 0.60 μg/mL for ATN and TMZ, respectively. The limit of detection (LOD) was 0.30 and 0.18 μg/mL for ATN and TMZ, respectively. Inter- and intraday precision and accuracy for ATN were within ±1.89% in pure form and within ±2.85% in urine samples. Inter- and intraday precision and accuracy for TMZ were within ± 3.99% in pure form and within ± 3.19% in urine samples.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30719043 PMCID: PMC6335664 DOI: 10.1155/2019/9625849
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Anal Chem ISSN: 1687-8760 Impact factor: 1.885
Figure 1Analytical performance data for HPLC determination of atenolol and trimetazidine in pure form and urine samples.
| Parameter | Atenolol | Trimetazidine | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pure form | Urine | Pure form | Urine | |
| Linearity range ( | 1.0–100 | 0.5-25 | 1.0– 100 | 0.25-25 |
| Correlation coefficient (r2) | 0.9998 | 0.9999 | 0.9999 | 0.9995 |
| Regression equation | Y=39.15X-5.7394 | Y=0.037X-8.0947 | Y=118.06X-58.05 | Y=0.3464X+31.83 |
| LOD ( | 0.30 | 0.11 | 0.18 | 0.05 |
| LOQ ( | 0.99 | 0.38 | 0.60 | 0.16 |
Figure 2HPLC-PDA chromatogram of standard neat solution of (A) atenolol 10 μg/mL and (B) trimetazidine 10 μg/mL.
Figure 3HPLC-PDA chromatogram of (A) atenolol 25 μg/mL and (B) trimetazidine 25 μg/mL in urine sample.
Figure 4HPLC-PDA chromatogram of blank urine.
System suitability parameters for the determination of the atenolol and trimetazidine in pure form/human urine.
| Parameters | Atenolol | Trimetazidine | Reference value [ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Retention time (tR) | 3.72/4.32 | 4.31/5.79 | ----- |
| Number of theoretical plates (N) | 13211/2896 | 13935/13668 | >2000 |
| increase with efficiency of separation | |||
| Tailing factor (T) | 0.97/1.85 | 0.71/1.11 | ≤2 |
| Capacity factor “Mass distribution ratio” (K′) | 2.44/2.32 | 2.98/3.46 | 1-10 acceptable |
| Height equivalent to one theoretical plate (HETP) | 0.01/0.04 | 0.01/0.01 | The smaller the value, the higher the column efficacy |
| Resolution (Rs) | 1.62/4.89 | >1.5 | |
| Good separation between peaks of interest. | |||
| Selectivity factor ( | 1.11/1.49 | > 1 | |
Statistical analysis of the proposed method in standard solution and the official/reported methods [1, 38].
| Atenolol | Trimetazidine | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proposed Method | Reported method [ | Proposed Method | Official method [ | |
| Mean | 100.34 | 99.66 | 100.35 | 98.39 |
| SD | 1.17 | 0.87 | 1.06 | 0.77 |
| RSD% | 1.16 | 0.88 | 1.06 | 1.12 |
| Variance | 1.36 | 0.76 | 1.13 | 0.59 |
| N | 8 | 5 | 8 | 3 |
| F – test | 1.8 (4.12) | - | 1.09 (4.74) | - |
| Student's | 1.11 (2.201) | - | 1.93 (2.262) | - |
Figures between parenthesis represent the corresponding tabulated values of t and F at P= 0.05.
Spectrophotometric method based on measurement of atenolol absorbance in 0.1 N HCl at 224.6 nm.
Intra- and interday precision and accuracy calculated from quality control (QC) samples in pure form.
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
| ||||||||
|
|
| % | % |
|
| % | % | |
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| 3 | 2.97 | 0.02 | 0.77 | -1.12 | 3.01 | 0.05 | 1.7 | 0.25 |
| 50 | 50 .95 | 0.45 | 0.88 | 1.89 | 50.17 | 0.41 | 0.82 | 0.34 |
| 75 | 75.004 | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.005 | 76.36 | 0.29 | 0.39 | 1.82 |
|
| ||||||||
| 3 | 2.89 | 0.09 | 3.45 | -3.67 | 2.88 | 0.09 | 3.02 | -3.99 |
| 50 | 50.09 | 0.23 | 0.45 | 0.18 | 50.07 | 0.26 | 0.52 | 0.15 |
| 75 | 77.14 | 1.31 | 1.7 | 2.85 | 76.34 | 2.05 | 2.68 | 1.78 |
Intra- and interday precision and accuracy calculated from quality control (QC) samples in human urine.
|
|
| |||||||
|
| ||||||||
|
|
| % | % |
|
| % | % | |
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
|
| 1.00 | 0.02 | 1.76 | 0.08 | 0.99 | 0.03 | 2.85 | -0.01 |
|
| 9.92 | 0.07 | 0.73 | -0.81 | 9.85 | 0.11 | 1.10 | -1.50 |
|
| 20.02 | 0.25 | 1.26 | 0.11 | 20.08 | 0.17 | 0.82 | 0.41 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| 0.50 | 0.004 | 0.75 | 0.98 | 0.50 | 0.004 | 0.69 | 0.90 |
|
| 10.19 | 0.01 | 0.98 | 1.9 | 10.14 | 0.12 | 1.18 | 1.37 |
|
| 19.36 | 0.08 | 0.42 | -3.19 | 19.41 | 0.08 | 0.42 | -2.94 |
Application of the proposed method in standard solution on pharmaceutical tablets.
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 4.87 | 97.44 | 5.00 | 4.73 | 94.54 | |
|
| 9.60 | 95.97 | 10.00 | 9.74 | 97.40 | |
|
| 28.63 | 95.42 | 30.00 | 28.50 | 95.05 | |
|
| 47.50 | 95.01 | 50.00 | 49.15 | 98.30 | |
|
| 71.67 | 95.56 | 75.00 | 71.24 | 94.99 | |
|
| 95.27 | 95.27 | 100.00 | 95.36 | 95.36 | |
|
| 95.78 | 95.94 | ||||
|
| 0.88 | 1.53 | ||||
|
| 0.36 | 0.63 | ||||
|
| 0.91 | 1.60 | ||||
|
| 0.77 | 2.34 | ||||
Average of three determinations.