| Literature DB >> 35478607 |
Asmaa G Gad1, Yasmin Mohammed Fayez2, Khadiga M Kelani1,2, Amr M Mahmoud2.
Abstract
Thin layer chromatography (TLC) is a powerful and simple technique for screening and quantifying low quality and counterfeit pharmaceutical products. The detection methods used to detect and quantify separate analytes in TLC ranges from the densitometric method to mass spectrometric or Raman spectroscopic methods. This work describes the development and optimization of a simple and sensitive TLC method utilizing a smartphone CCD camera for verification of both identity and quantity of antibiotics in dosage form, namely ofloxacin and ornidazole. Mixtures of ofloxacin and ornidazole were chromatographed on a silica gel 60 F254 plate as a stationary phase. The optimized mobile phase is n-butanol : methanol : ammonia (8 : 1 : 1.5 by volume). Iodine vapor has been used as a "universal stain" to visualize the spots on the TLC plates in order to obtain a visual image using the smartphone camera and a desk lamp as an illumination source, thus eliminating the need for a UV illumination source. The recorded images were processed to calculate the R f values (R f values for ofloxacin and ornidazole were 0.12 and 0.76, respectively) which provide identity of the drugs while spot intensity was calculated using a commercially available smartphone app and employed for quantitative analysis of the antibiotics and "acetaminophen" as an example of a counterfeit substance. The smartphone TLC method yielded a linearity of ofloxacin and ornidazole in the range of 12.5-62.5 μg/band and 500-1000 μg/band, respectively. The limit of detection was found to be 1.6 μg/spot for ofloxacin and 97.8 μg/spot for ornidazole. The proposed method was compared with the bench top densitometric method for verification using a Camag TLC Scanner 3, the spot areas were scanned at 320 nm. The R f value of ofloxacin and ornidazole was calculated to be 0.12 and 0.76, respectively. The densitometric method yielded a linearity of ofloxacin and ornidazole in the range of 5-40 μg/band and 5-50 μg/band, respectively. The limit of detection was found to be 0.8 μg/spot for ofloxacin and 1.1 μg/spot for ornidazole. The proposed method has been successfully applied for the determination of ofloxacin and ornidazole present in more than one pharmaceutical dosage form and was comparable to the densitometric method. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 35478607 PMCID: PMC9033552 DOI: 10.1039/d1ra01346g
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1(a) Chemical structure of ofloxacin and (b) chemical structure of ornidazole.
Fig. 2TLC plate showing the three separated compounds; OFL, ORN, acetaminophen visualized with iodine.
The relation between luminance and different concentrations of OFL and ORN (12.5, 37.5, 50, 62.5 μg/band), (500, 600, 700, 900, 1000 μg/band), respectively
| Drug | Concentrations (μg/band) | Average luminance (average of 3 replicates of the same spot) | Standard deviation (SD) | Average luminance (average of three replicates of 3 different spots) | Standard deviation (SD) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OFL | 12.5 | 14.3 | 0.5 | 14.4 | 0.6 |
| 25 | 12.7 | 0.5 | 12.5 | 0.5 | |
| 37.5 | 10.7 | 0.5 | 10.73 | 0.5 | |
| 50 | 9 | 0.8 | 8.9 | 0.5 | |
| 62.5 | 7 | 0.6 | 7.3 | 0.6 | |
| ORN | 500 | 34.3 | 0.5 | 34.7 | 0.6 |
| 600 | 33.3 | 0.6 | 33.4 | 0.4 | |
| 700 | 31.3 | 0.5 | 31.4 | 0.6 | |
| 900 | 29.3 | 0.5 | 28.4 | 0.5 | |
| 1000 | 26.3 | 0.5 | 26.4 | 0.6 |
Comparison between validation parameters of the proposed TLC-visualization method and TLC-densitometric method for determination of ofloxacin and ornidazole in their binary mixture
| TLC-visualization method | TLC-densitometric method | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameters | OFL | ORN | OFL | ORN |
| Wave length | 320.0 nm | 320.0 nm | ||
| Range (μg/band) | 12.5–62.5 | 500–1000 | 5–40 | 5–50 |
| Linearity (regression equation) |
|
|
|
|
| Slope | 0.15 | 0.02 | 434.5 | 516.9 |
| Intercept | 16.2 | 43.6 | 10 455 | 23 107 |
| Correlation coefficient | 0.9999 | 0.9991 | 0.9999 | 0.9999 |
| Accuracy | 100.0 ± 0.6 | 100.1 ± 0.7 | 99.9 ± 0.7 | 99.7 ± 0.9 |
| Specificity | 98.6 ± 0.4 | 100.5 ± 1.5 | ||
| LOD (μg/band) | 1.6 | 97.8 | 0.8 | 1.1 |
| LOQ (μg/band | 4.9 | 296.3 | 2.3 | 3.3 |
| Precision (±RSD%) | ||||
| (a) Repeatability | ±0.8 | ±0.7 | ±0.4 | ±0.8 |
| (b) Intermediate precision | ±0.4 | ±0.5 | ±0.3 | ±0.7 |
Average of three determinations.
Accuracy (the mean of 5 different concentrations of each OFL and OR).
Recovery of different laboratory prepared mixtures containing different ratios of OFL and OR.
Limit of detection is determined via calculations, LOD = (SD of response/slope) × 3.3; LOQ = (SD of response/slope) × 10.
Intraday precision (the RSD of 3 different concentrations) (10, 20, 25 μg/band for OFL) & (5, 10, 50 μg/band for OR) in (TLC-densitometric) and (12.5, 25, 37.5 μg/band for OFL) & (500, 700, 900 μg/band for OR) in TLC-smartphone, 3 replicates each, within the same day.
Interday precision (the RSD of 3 different concentrations) (10, 20, 25 μg/band for OFL) & (5, 10, 50 μg/band for OR) in (TLC-densitometric) and (12.5, 25, 37.5 μg/band for OFL) & (500, 700, 900 μg/band for OR) in TLC-smartphone, 3 replicates each, on 3 successive days.
Determination of OFL and ORN in ORNI-O™ tablet by TLC-smartphone method and the TLC-densitometric
| Pharmaceutical formulation |
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| OFL | ORN | OFL | ORN |
| 99.1 ± 0.7 | 98.4 ± 0.6 | 98.3 ± 0.5 | 99.9 ± 0.6 | |
Average of three determinations.
Batch no. ALT19317 (labeled to contain 200 mg OFL and 500 mg ORN).
Fig. 32D TLC chromatogram of (1) ofloxacin (Rf = 0.12) and (2) ornidazole (Rf = 0.76), at 320.0 nm using n-butanol : methanol : ammonia (8 : 1 : 1.5, by volume) as a developing system.
Determination of ofloxacin and ornidazole in their laboratory prepared mixtures by the TLC-densitometric method
| Mix. ratio |
| |
|---|---|---|
| OFL : OR | OFL | ORN |
| 10 : 10 | 98.1 | 100.8 |
| 10 : 20 | 98.5 | 98 |
| 20 : 10 | 98.5 | 100.6 |
| 10 : 25 | 98.6 | 102.3 |
| 40 : 10 | 99.3 | 100.7 |
| Mean | 98.6 | 100.5 |
| SD | 0.4 | 1.5 |
Average of three determinations.
Statistical analysis of the results obtained by the proposed method and the official method for the determination of OFL and ORN in pure powder form
| Item | OFL | ORN | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proposed method | Official method | Proposed method | Reported method | |
| Mean | 100.1 | 100.4 | 100.7 | 99.7 |
| SD | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.8 | 0.9 |
| Variance | 0.9 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.8 |
|
| 5 | 6 | 5 | 5 |
| Student's | 0.39 (2.3) | 0.72 (2.36) | ||
|
| 1.2 (5.41) | 1.34 (9.12) | ||
Proposed method is the TLC-smartphone method.
Potentiometric method by dissolving 0.3 g of OFL in 100 mL of anhydrous acetic acid. Titrate with 0.1 M perchloric acid and determine the end point.[37] (pharmacopeial method which readings of OFL were compared with).
Reported method is the method which ORN readings were compared with, as ORN has no official method.[38]
Numbers between parentheses represents the corresponding tabulated values of t and F at P = 0.05.