| Literature DB >> 34886043 |
Marek Konop1, Mateusz Rybka1, Emilia Waraksa2, Anna K Laskowska3, Artur Nowiński1, Tomasz Grzywacz4, Wojciech J Karwowski5, Adrian Drapała1, Ewa Maria Kłodzińska2.
Abstract
In competitive athletes, the differential diagnosis between nonpathological changes in cardiac morphology associated with training (commonly referred to as "athlete's heart") and certain cardiac diseases with the potential for sudden death is an important and not uncommon clinical problem. The use of noninvasive, fast, and cheap analytical techniques can help in making diagnostic differentiation and planning subsequent clinical strategies. Recent studies have demonstrated the role of gut microbiota and their metabolites in the onset and the development of cardiovascular diseases. Trimethylamine (TMA), a gut bacteria metabolite consisting of carnitine and choline, has recently emerged as a potentially toxic molecule to the circulatory system. The present work aims to develop a simple and cost-effective capillary electrophoresis-based method for the determination of TMA in biological samples. Analytical characteristics of the proposed method were evaluated through the study of its linearity (R2 > 0.9950) and the limit of detection and quantification (LOD = 1.2 µg/mL; LOQ = 3.6 µg/mL). The method shows great potential in high-throughput screening applications for TMA analysis in biological samples as a novel potential biomarker of cardiovascular diseases. The proposed electrophoretic method for the determination of TMA in biological samples from patients with cardiac disease is now in progress.Entities:
Keywords: biomarkers; capillary electrophoresis (CE); cardiovascular diseases in athletes; determination of trimethylamine (TMA)
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34886043 PMCID: PMC8656779 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182312318
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Hemolysis of rat and human red blood cells induced by TMA and TMAO. (p-value < 0.05 was considered significant *** p < 0.001, two-way analysis of variance, followed by Bonferroni post hoc tests)
Figure 2Viability of rat fibroblasts treated with TMA and TMAO for 24 and 48 h. The data are statistically significant when p < 0.05 using one-way analysis of variance. (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001)
Figure 3Electropherogram obtained for different buffer solutions before derivatization: (a) Agilent Buffer, (b) Borate Buffer, (c) Borate-SDS Buffer, (d) Phtalic Buffer, (e) Working Buffer, (f) Acetate Buffer, (g) TBE Buffer, (h) Formic Buffer.
Figure 4The electropherogram obtained for TMA was tested in different biological samples after the derivatization process. ((a) Rat fecal supernatant, (b) Rat urine, (c) Rat plasma, (d) Old rat plasma, (e) Rat fecal supernatant + Internal Standard, (f) Rat urine + Internal Standard, (g) Rat plasma + Internal Standard, (h) Human plasma)
Method validation data.
| Characterization Parameter | TMA |
|---|---|
| Calibration range | 6.1–3125.0 |
| Calibration curve equation | y = 0.0118x + 9.5357 |
| Linearity (R2) | 0.9950 |
| LOD | 1.2 |
| LOQ | 3.6 |
R2: coefficient of determination; LOD: limit of detection; LOQ: limit of quantification.
Information on the results obtained from the analysis of the real samples.
| Real Urine Samples | Real Plasma Samples | Real Faces Samples | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample Name | Average TMA Concentration | Sample Name | Average TMA Concentration | Sample Name | Average TMA Concentration |
| U1 | 1.0 × 102 ± 1.7 | P1 | 3.4 × 10 ± 3.6 | F1 | 266.6 ± 3.2 |
| U2 | 6.8 × 10 ± 1.0 | P2 | nd ** | F2 | 429.9 ± 3.2 |
| U3 | 9.0 × 10 ± 8.3 | P3 | nd ** | F3 | nd ** |
| U4 | 2.9 × 10 ± 3.5 | P4 | 1.25 × 102 ± 0.19 | F4 | 562.1 ± 6.7 |
| U5 | 1.1 × 103 ± 3.6 × 10 | P5 | nd ** | F5 | 61.7 ± 1.8 |
| U6 | 1.3 × 102 ± 1.0 × 10 | P6 | 2.1 × 10 ± 3.2 | F6 | 28.6 ± 1.8 |
| U7 | 3.1 × 102 ± 4.1 × 10 | P7 | 7.8 × 10 ± 5.3 | F7 | nd ** |
| U8 | 1.2 × 102 ± 1.0 × 10 | P8 | nd ** | F8 | 578.6 ± 1.1 |
| U9 | 7.9 × 10 ± 1.2 × 10 | P9 | nd ** | F9 | 31.1 ± 1.8 |
| U10 | 3.5 × 102 ± 2.8 × 10 | P10 | nd ** | F10 | 71.4 ± 2.1 |
| U11 | 3.5 × 102 ± 3.1 × 10 | P11 | nd ** | F11 | 244.0 ± 9.6 |
| U12 | 4.0 × 102 ± 4.4 × 10 | P12 | nd ** | F12 | 277.6 ± 3.2 |
| U13 | 1.6 × 102 ± 2.4 × 10 | P13 | nd ** | F13 | nd ** |
| U14 | 1.5 × 102 ± 2.1 × 10 | P14 | nd ** | F14 | 522.5 ± 27.9 |
| U15 | 2.6 × 102 ± 1.1 × 10 | P15 | 1.1 × 103 ± 1.1 × 102 | F15 | 102.3 ± 1.1 |
* expressed as an average concentration (n = 2) ± U, where U is the expanded uncertainty using a coverage factor of 2, which gives a level of confidence of approximately 95%, ** nd—