Use of headspace solid-phase microextraction (HS-SPME) in hair analysis for organic compounds

Headspace solid phase microextraction (HS-SPME) has advantages of high purity of the extract, avoidance of organic solvents and simple technical manipulation and can be used in combination with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) in the hair analysis of a number of drugs. HS-SPME coupled with the hydrolysis of the hair matrix by 4% sodium hydroxide in the presence of excess sodium sulphate and of a suitable internal standard proved to be a convenient one-step method for the measurement of many lipophilic basic drugs such as nicotine, amphetamine derivatives, local anaesthetics, phencyclidine, ketamine, methadone, diphenhydramine, tramadol, tricyclic antidepressants and phenothiazines. Detection limits were between 0.05 and 1.0 ng/mg. From spiked 10-mg hair samples absolute recoveries between 0.04 and 5.7% were found. These recoveries decreased considerably if larger sample amounts were used, perhaps due to increased drug solubility in the aqueous phase or to elevated viscosity in the presence of dissolved hair proteins. Because of the phenolic hydroxyl group a change of pH after alkaline hair digestion (by adding excess orthophosphoric acid) was necessary for the detection of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta 9-THC), cannabinol (CBN) and cannabidiol (CBD) by HS-SPME. Nevertheless, the detection limits were such that only CBN could be detected in hair of a consumer. Clomethiazole, a compound hydrolysed in alkali, was measured by HS-SPME after extraction with aqueous buffer. The detection limit was 0.5 ng/mg. Cocaine could not be detected by HS-SPME. The application of HS-SPME to hair samples from several forensic and clinical cases is described.     

Use of solid-phase microextraction (SPME) for the determination of methadone and EDDP in human hair by GC-MS

Solid-phase microextraction (SPME) is a new extraction technique with many advantages: small sample volume, simplicity, quickness and solvent-free. It is mainly applied to environmental analysis, but is also useful for the extraction of drugs from biological samples. In this paper the use of SPME is proposed for the determination of methadone and its main metabolite EDDP in hair by GC-MS. The hair samples were washed, cut into 1-mm segments, and incubated with Pronase E for 12 h. A 100-micron polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) film fibre was submerged for 30 min in a diluted solution of the hydrolysis liquid (1:4 with borax buffer) containing methadone-d3 and EDDP-d3 as internal standards. Once the microextraction was concluded the fibre was directly inserted into the CG injection port. Linearity was found for methadone and EDDP in the range studied, 1.0-50 ng/mg hair, with correlation coefficients higher than 0.99. Interassay relative standard deviation (R.S.D) was determined to be less than 13.30% for methadone and less than 8.94% for EDDP, at 3.0 and 30.0 ng/mg. Analytical recoveries were close to 100% for both compounds on spiked samples. The method was applied to the analysis of real hair samples from eight patients of a methadone maintenance programme. The concentration of methadone in hair ranged from 2.45 to 78.10 ng/mg, and for EDDP from 0.98 to 7.76 ng/mg of hair.     

Analysis of drugs of abuse in hair by automated solid-phase extraction, GC/EI/MS and GC ion trap/CI/MS

In our laboratory, analysis of human hair for the detection of drugs of abuse was first performed in 1995. Initially, requests for hair analysis were few, and it is only since 1997 that these analyses have become routine. As demand grew, we developed an automatic solid-phase extraction method; the use of a robot ASPEC allowed us to drop certain fastidious manipulations, and to treat a large number of samples at a time. This method is described, along with analysis by gas-chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC/MS) in selected ion monitoring mode (SIM), for the following drugs: codeine, 6-monoacetylmorphine (6-MAM), morphine, cocaine, methadone, ecstasy (MDMA) and Eve (MDE). This requires prior derivatization with propionic anhydride. The different validation parameters, linearity, repeatability, recovery and detection limits are described, as well as the application of this method to some real cases. Analysis of these cases is also performed by an ion trap GC/MS in chemical ionization mode (GC/IT/CI/MS) in order to demonstrate the usefulness of this technique as a complement to routine analysis. Analysis by GC/IT/CI/MS indeed avoids the risk of false-positive results by the identification of metabolites.     

体液中常见滥用药物的系统筛选分析

本文建立了体液中常见滥用药物的筛选分析体系.尿液或血液经固相萃取(SPE)或液提取(LLE)后,直接用GC/NPD分析或经TFA、BSTFA衍生化后用GC/MS分析.方法适用于同时分析甲基苯丙胺、MDMA、度冷丁、去甲度冷丁、曲马多、美沙酮、EDDP、可卡因、苯甲酰芽子碱、可待因、安定、氯丙嗪、吗啡、单乙酰吗啡等十四种常见滥用药物及代谢物.SPE法和LLE法回收率分别为66～102%和50～86%,最低检出限为2-5ng/ml尿.涉毒案件的鉴定应用表明该分析方法简便、快速、可靠.     

Hair analysis by immunological methods from the beginning to 2000

Immunoassays for hair testing must satisfy three requirements: (1) They must have cross-reactivity with parent drug and lipophilic metabolites actually found in hair (2) they must not experience interference from the dissolved hair matrix and (3) they must be titered for cutoffs appropriate to the drug concentrations found in hair. Because the analytes found in hair after drug use are generally the parent drug or its lipophilic metabolites, immunoassays developed and intended for urine testing are not suitable for hair. Immunoassays whose antibodies are bound to a solid support, such as coated-tube radioimmunoassay or coated-plate ELISA tests, experience less matrix interference than those which use other means of separation of bound and free fractions. Homogenous assays are not suitable for hair testing because the hair matrix frequently interferes in the detection of the signal. Historically radioimmunoassays for drugs of abuse were first used for detecting drugs in hair. Currently ELISAs and coated-plate 96 well microplate EIAs are employed for screening hair digests or extracts for drugs. The optimum cutoffs for immunoassays for drugs in hair should be chosen based on the analyte concentration which produces the fewest false positive or false negative results when applied to tests of hair from known users and non-users of drugs. A hair immunoassay test at these cutoffs should have a sensitivity and specificity of better than 90%. The predictive value of the test will depend on the prevalence of drug use in the tested population. Cutoffs or decision thresholds for immunoassays used for screening for drugs should not be at the limit of detection of the assay because that produces a very large incidence of false positives. Because immunoassays are ligand-binding assays, they have a short range of linearity with low precision at both ends of the range. In the future, immunoassays will continue to be used for screening hair and other matrices for drugs of abuse because they provide rapid, inexpensive automated procedures for separating negative specimens from those which are suspected of containing drugs. For forensic purposes, all positive results must be confirmed by an independent analysis using a procedure based on a different property of the analyte. An immunoassay test should not be confirmed by a second immunoassay test but by a chromatographic test performed on a different dissolved or extracted aliquot of the original specimen.     

Methadone and EDDP in hair from human subjects following a maintenance program: results of a pilot study

A specific method has been developed for the quantitative determination of methadone (MTD) and its major metabolite, 2-ethylidene-1,5-dimethyl-3,3-diphenylpyrrolidine (EDDP), in hair.An amount of 50mg hair samples were incubated in 0.01M HCl overnight at 60 degrees C and deuterated internal standards of MTD and EDDP were added before extraction. Hydrolyzed solutions were extracted by automated solid-phase extraction procedure and analyzed on a gas chromatography (GC) coupled to a ion trap mass spectrometer (MS). Positive chemical ionization was used with acetonitrile as liquid reagent. The different validation parameters, linearity, repeatability, recovery and detection limits are presented. A relative standard deviation (R.S.D.) of 12 and 11% was obtained for the repeatability of MTD and EDDP, respectively. The limits of quantification (LOQ) was 0.05ng/mg for MTD and 0.2ng/mg for EDDP.A number of 26 hair samples from human subjects following a long-term MTD therapy were analyzed by this method. Blood samples of these subjects were analyzed with a routine method using a liquid-liquid extraction and GC/nitrogen phosphorus detector (NPD). MTD was quantified in blood and hair samples and EDDP found in 50% of the hair sample.A comparison was made between the concentrations found in blood or in hair and the dose administrated. This study could demonstrate that there is no relation between the administrated dose and MTD or EDDP concentrations in hair.     

Evaluation of the catalytic decomposition of H2O2 through use of organo-metallic complexes--a potential link to the luminol presumptive blood test

Hair testing for drugs of abuse is performed in Lombardy by eleven analytical laboratories accredited for forensic purposes, the most frequent purposes being driving license regranting and workplace drug testing. Individuals undergoing hair testing for these purposes can choose the laboratory in which the analyses have to be carried out. The aim of our study was to perform an interlaboratory exercise in order to verify the level of standardization of hair testing for drugs of abuse in these accredited laboratories; nine out of the eleven laboratories participated in this exercise. Sixteen hair strands coming from different subjects were longitudinally divided in 3-4 aliquots and distributed to participating laboratories, which were requested to apply their routine methods. All the participants analyzed opiates (morphine and 6-acetylmorphine) and cocainics (cocaine and benzoylecgonine) while only six analyzed methadone and amphetamines (amphetamine, methamphetamine, MDMA, MDA and MDEA) and five Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). The majority of the participants (seven labs) performed acidic hydrolysis to extract the drugs from the hair and analysis by GC-MS, while two labs used LC-MS/MS. Eight laboratories performed initial screening tests by Enzyme Multiplied Immunoassay Technique (EMIT), Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) or Cloned Enzyme Donor Immunoassay (CEDIA). Results demonstrated a good qualitative performance for all the participants, since no false positive results were reported by any of them. Quantitative data were quite scattered, but less in samples with low concentrations of analytes than in those with higher concentrations. Results from this first regional interlaboratory exercise show that, on the one hand, individuals undergoing hair testing would have obtained the same qualitative results in any of the nine laboratories. On the other hand, the scatter in quantitative results could cause some inequalities if any interpretation of the data is required.     

Analysis of drugs of abuse in hair: evaluation of the immunochemical method VMA-T vs. LC-MS/MS or GC-MS

Hair analysis is an elaborate and time-consuming multi-step process. The immunometric test VMA-T from Comedical has been evaluated as screening assay for hair analysis. From routine work, authentic samples were selected that were positive for opiates, cocaine, MDMA-type drugs, amphetamines, methadone or THC. These hair samples were investigated by LC-MS or GC-MS and the VMA-T procedure, respectively. Using the cut-off values recommended by the Society of Hair Testing, the VMA-T method discriminates with good sensitivity between negative and positive hair samples and is an expedient screening method for drugs in keratinized matrices such as hair. In order to save time and resources, the residue of the VMA-T extraction solution can be reused for confirmation analysis by LC-MS except for cocaine.     

Analysis of pain management drugs, specifically fentanyl, in hair: application to forensic specimens

This article discusses the immunoassay screening of pain management drugs, and the mass spectrometric confirmation of fentanyl in human hair. Hair specimens were screened for fentanyl, opiates (including oxycodone), tramadol, propoxyphene, carisoprodol, methadone, and benzodiazepines and any positive results were confirmed using gas chromatography or liquid chromatography with mass spectral detection. The specific focus of the work was the determination of fentanyl in hair, since autopsy specimens were also available for comparison with hair concentrations. Using two-dimensional gas chromatography with electron impact mass spectrometric detection, fentanyl was confirmed in four of nine hair specimens collected at autopsy. The accuracy of the assay at 10 pg/mg was 95.17% and the inter-day and intra-day precision was 5.04 and 13.24%, respectively (n=5). The assay was linear over the range 5-200 pg/mg with a correlation of r(2)>0.99. The equation of the calibration curve forced through the origin was y=0.0053x and the limit of quantitation of the assay was 5 pg/mg. The fentanyl concentrations detected were 12, 17, 490, and 1930 pg/mg and the results were compared with toxicology from routine post-mortem analysis. The screening of pain management drugs in hair is useful in cases where other matrices may not be available, and in routine testing of hair for abused drugs.     

HAIRVEQ 2006: evolution of laboratories' performance after different educational actions

HAIRVEQ is a proficiency testing program for hair analysis of illicit drugs organized by the Istituto Superiore di Sanità (Rome, Italy) and the Institut Municipal d'Investigació Mèdica (Barcelona, Spain). The aim of the three exercises performed in 2006 was the evaluation of 32 laboratories' performance when analyzing the same hair sample containing opiates, cocaine and methadone, after carrying out some specific educational interventions. In the first round, the sample was sent to be analyzed following laboratory routine methodology. In the second round, standard operating procedures (SOP) for hair testing including sample preparation, method validation and qualitative and quantitative data evaluation, and an open hair sample for SOP training were also sent together with other hair samples including the one used for performance evaluation. After the second round, a workshop was held with participant laboratories to discuss methodological issues and interpretation of obtained results. An additional amount of open samples was distributed to the laboratories for implementing the SOPs. In the third round, the same unknown sample containing opiates, cocaine and methadone was resent for the final evaluation of laboratory performance. In the first round, 11 incorrect qualitative results (10 false negative and 1 false positive) were reported by seven laboratories (22%), in the second round, a reduction in the number of incorrect results was observed (4 false negatives and 1 false positive were reported by four laboratories, 13%) and in the third round, 5 false positives and 5 false negatives were reported by seven laboratories (22%). Concerning quantitative results, the scatter was similar between the three rounds and similar to the ones reported by other proficiency tests in hair analysis. More educational actions should be addressed to a group of laboratories, which did not yet show satisfying qualitative and quantitative results.     

Target screening and confirmation of 35 licit and illicit drugs and metabolites in hair by LC-MSMS

A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MSMS) target screening in 50mg hair was developed and fully validated for 35 analytes (Δ9-tetrahidrocannabinol (THC), morphine, 6-acetylmorphine, codeine, methadone, fentanyl, amphetamine, methamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine, benzoylecgonine, cocaine, lysergic acid diethylamide, ketamine, scopolamine, alprazolam, bromazepam, clonazepam, diazepam, flunitrazepam, 7-aminoflunitrazepam, lorazepam, lormetazepam, nordiazepam, oxazepam, tetrazepam, triazolam, zolpidem, zopiclone, amitriptyline, citalopram, clomipramine, fluoxetine, paroxetine and venlafaxine). Hair decontamination was performed with dichloromethane, and incubation in 2 mL of acetonitrile at 50°C overnight. Extraction procedure was performed in 2 steps, first liquid-liquid extraction, hexane:ethyl acetate (55:45, v:v) at pH 9, followed by solid-phase extraction (Strata-X cartridges). Chromatographic separation was performed in AtlantisT3 (2.1 mm × 100 mm, 3 μm) column, acetonitrile and ammonium formate pH 3 as mobile phase, and 32 min total run time. One transition per analyte was monitored in MRM mode. To confirm a positive result, a second injection monitoring 2 transitions was performed. The method was specific (no endogenous interferences, n=9); LOD was 0.2-50 pg/mg and LOQ 0.5-100 pg/mg; linearity ranged from 0.5-100 to 2000-20,000 pg/mg; imprecision <15%; analytical recovery 85-115%; extraction efficiency 4.1-85.6%; and process efficiency 2.5-207.7%; 27 analytes showed ion suppression (up to -86.2%), 4 ion enhancement (up to 647.1%), and 4 no matrix effect; compounds showed good stability 24-48 h in autosampler. The method was applied to 17 forensic cases. In conclusion, a sensitive and specific target screening of 35 analytes in 50mg hair, including drugs of abuse (THC, cocaine, opiates, amphetamines) and medicines (benzodiazepines, antidepressants) was developed and validated, achieving lower cut-offs than Society of Hair Testing recommendations.     

Results of hair analyses for drugs of abuse and comparison with self-reports and urine tests

Urine as well as head and pubic hair samples from drug abusers were analysed for opiates, cocaine and its metabolites, amphetamines, methadone and cannabinoids. Urine immunoassay results and the results of hair tests by means of gas chromatography-mass spectrometry were compared to the self-reported data of the patients in an interview protocol. With regard to the study group, opiate abuse was claimed from the majority in self-reports (89%), followed by cannabinoids (55%), cocaine (38%), and methadone (32%). Except for opiates the comparison between self-reported drug use and urinalysis at admission showed a low correlation. In contrast to urinalysis, hair tests revealed consumption in more cases. There was also a good agreement between self-reports of patients taking part in an official methadone maintenance program and urine test results concerning methadone. However, hair test results demonstrated that methadone abuse in general was under-reported by people who did not participate in a substitution program. Comparing self-reports and the results of hair analyses drug use was dramatically under-reported, especially cocaine. Cocaine hair tests appeared to be highly sensitive and specific in identifying past cocaine use even in settings of negative urine tests. In contrast to cocaine, hair lacks sensitivity as a detection agent for cannabinoids and a proof of cannabis use by means of hair analysis should include the sensitive detection of the metabolite THC carboxylic acid in the lower picogram range.     

Hair analysis for delta(9)-THC,delta(9)-THC-COOH,CBN and CBD,by GC/MS-EI. Comparison with GC/MS-NCI for delta(9)-THC-COOH

A sensitive analytical method was developed for quantitative analysis of delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (delta(9)-THC), 11-nor-delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol-carboxylic acid (delta(9)-THC-COOH), cannabinol (CBN) and cannabidiol (CBD) in human hair. The identification of delta(9)-THC-COOH in hair would document Cannabis use more effectively than the detection of parent drug (delta(9)-THC) which might have come from environmental exposure. Ketamine was added to hair samples as internal standard for CBN and CBD. Ketoprofen was added to hair samples as internal standard for the other compounds. Samples were hydrolyzed with beta-glucuronidase/arylsulfatase for 2h at 40 degrees C. After cooling, samples were extracted with a liquid-liquid extraction procedure (with chloroform/isopropyl alcohol, after alkalinization, and n-hexane/ethyl acetate, after acidification), which was developed in our laboratory. The extracts were analysed before and after derivatization with pentafluoropropionic anhydride (PFPA) and pentafluoropropanol (PFPOH) using a Hewlett Packard gas chromatographer/mass spectrometer detector, in electron impact mode (GC/MS-EI). Derivatized delta(9)-THC-COOH was also analysed using a Hewlett Packard gas chromatographer/mass spectrometer detector, in negative ion chemical ionization mode (GC/MS-NCI) using methane as the reagent gas. Responses were linear ranging from 0.10 to 5.00 ng/mg hair for delta(9)-THC and CBN, 0.10-10.00 ng/mg hair for CBD, 0.01-5.00 ng/mg for delta(9)-THC-COOH (r(2)>0.99). The intra-assay precisions ranged from <0.01 to 12.40%. Extraction recoveries ranged from 80.9 to 104.0% for delta(9)-THC, 85.9-100.0% for delta(9)-THC-COOH, 76.7-95.8% for CBN and 71.0-94.0% for CBD. The analytical method was applied to 87 human hair samples, obtained from individuals who testified in court of having committed drug related crimes. Quantification of delta(9)-THC-COOH using GC/MS-NCI was found to be more convenient than GC/MS-EI. The latter may give rise to false negatives due to the detection limit.     

The toxicological challenges in the European research project DRUID

Within the epidemiological studies of the integrated European research project DRUID (Driving Under the Influence of Drugs, alcohol and medicines), 13 laboratories from across Europe will analyse whole blood, oral fluid (OF) or urine from the general driving population and injured drivers. To ensure the comparability of toxicological results from the different studies, the collection of samples, analytical methods, target analytes and analytical cut-offs have been standardized for all laboratories involved.Target analytes were selected based on suspected impairing effects and prevalence. Twenty-three drugs are included in the ‘core list’ for which analysis is mandatory: ethanol, amphetamine, MDMA, MDA, MDEA, methamphetamine, cocaine, benzoylecgonine, THC, THC-COOH, 6-acetylmorphine, diazepam, flunitrazepam, alprazolam, clonazepam, oxazepam, nordiazepam, zolpidem, zopiclone, lorazepam, morphine, codeine and methadone. Additionally, 28 other drugs will be analysed in 1–12 countries.All whole blood samples are collected in glass Vacutainer-type tubes containing sodium fluoride and potassium oxalate. Based on a comparative study of 10 collection devices, it was decided to collect oral fluid using the Statsure™ device. Since only a small sample volume is available (5–10 mL blood and 1 mL oral fluid), all laboratories have to develop methods for simultaneous detection of the target analytes. All laboratories agreed to use either LC–MS–MS or GC–MS in SIM-mode. Proficiency testing for both blood and oral fluid are organized.Analytical cut-offs were established for the core list based on those used in ROSITA-2, SAMHSA cut-off values for oral fluid and recommendations from an expert meeting in Talloires.Because of practical and legal considerations, different sample types are used: whole blood, serum/plasma and oral fluid. Literature on correlation between analyte concentrations in these body fluids is limited, which makes several comparisons of study results difficult: (1) comparison of epidemiological (blood, oral fluid and urine) and experimental studies (serum and plasma) performed in DRUID and (2) comparisons within the epidemiological studies themselves (most countries: oral fluid in road-side survey, blood in hospital studies).A combination of literature findings, new findings from DRUID and semi-quantitative results will likely have to be used to solve these problems.     

HPLC-DAD determination of opioids, cocaine and their metabolites in plasma

High performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection (HPLC-DAD) was used to develop a method for the simultaneous determination of morphine, codeine, 6-acetylmorphine (6AM), cocaine, benzoylecgonine (BEG), cocaethylene, methadone and its metabolite, 2-ethylidene-1,5-dimethyldiphenylpyrrolidine (EDDP), in plasma. Following solid-phase extraction with Bond Elut Certify cartridges, chromatography was performed on an X-Terra RP8 column (250 mm x 4.6 mm i.d., 5 microm particle size), using acetonitrile-phosphate buffer pH 6.53 as mobile phase and elution in the gradient mode. The detector response was linear at concentrations over the range 0.1-10 microg/mL in plasma, and the correlation coefficients for the eight drugs studied were all higher than 0.99. The average extraction recoveries from plasma ranged from 60% for BEG to 95% for methadone. The precision was acceptable, with coefficients of variation oscillating between 2.55% and 6.45%. The accuracy was found to be within satisfactory limits (+/- 8.1%). Finally, the method was applied to 21 plasma samples from fatal overdoses, obtaining positive results for two or more drugs.     

Quantitative determination of amphetamines, cocaine, and opiates in human hair by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry

Hair of young subjects (N = 36) suspected for drug abuse was analysed for morphine, codeine, heroin, 6-acetylmorphine, cocaine, methadone, amphetamine, methamphetamine, 3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), and 3,4-methylenedioxyethylamphetamine (MDEA). The analysis of morphine, codeine, heroin, 6-acetylmorphine, cocaine, and methadone in hair included incubation in methanol, solid-phase extraction, derivatisation by the mixture of propionic acid anhydride and pyridine, and gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS). For amphetamine, methamphetamine, MDA, MDMA, and MDEA analysis, hair samples were incubated in 1M sodium hydroxide, extracted with ethyl acetate, derivatised with heptafluorobutyric acid anhydride (HFBA), and assayed by GC/MS. The methods were reproducible (R.S.D. = 5.0-16.1%), accurate (85.1-100.6%), and sensitive (LoD = 0.05-0.30ng/mg). The applied methods confirmed consumption of heroin in 18 subjects based on positive 6-acetylmorphine. Among these 18 heroin consumers, methadone was found in four, MDMA in two, and cocaine in two subjects. Cocaine only was present in two, methadone only in two, methamphetamine only in two, and MDMA only in seven of the 36 subjects. In two out of nine coloured and bleached hair samples, no drug was found. Despite the small number of subjects, this study has been able to indicate the trend in drug abuse among young people in Croatia.     

The use of supercritical fluid extraction for the determination of amphetamines in hair

A laboratory study interested in the analysis of human hair for drugs-of-abuse was conducted to determine if drugs could be detected and quantified from hair. Supercritical fluid extraction (SFE) techniques followed by GC-MS analysis were applied to extract amphetamines from hair. The group of amphetamines included methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA), methylenedioxymetamphetamine (MDMA), methylenedioxyethylamphetamine (MDEA) and internal standard mephentermine (MP). To validate information on amphetamine use in hair, powdered hair samples free from drugs were collected and soaked in a known amphetamine standard solution. Authentic fortified case hair samples taken from known drug users known to have consumed amphetamines were also analyzed for amphetamine. Results from this study show that amphetamine use can be detected in spiked and authentic fortified human hair using SFE techniques for qualitative and quantitative reproducible results.     

固相微萃取技术在毛发药物分析中的应用

固相微萃取（SPME）可与GC/MS、HPLC/MS等在线联用,实现分离、分析一体化的特点为其在毛发药物分析中的应用提供了可能性和良好的应用前景。本文对SPME技术在毛发中滥用药物如苯丙胺类、美沙酮、大麻、可卡因、利多卡因等及其相应代谢产物的分析研究及应用进展做一综述。     

Analytical strategy for detecting doping agents in hair

Lists of banned classes of doping agents are released by the International Olympic Committee, adopted by other sports authorities and updated regularly, including the substance classes stimulants, narcotics, diuretics, anabolic agents, peptide hormones, beta-blockers etc. There are different classes of restriction: anabolic and masking agents (anabolic steroids, diuretics etc.) are always banned for athletes regardless of their topical activity (training or competition) several substances are permitted with certain restrictions (caffeine below a cut-off value, or inhalation of some beta 2 agonists) beta-blockers are prohibited in competitions of certain sports disciplines the majority of the substances (stimulants, narcotics etc.) is prohibited during competitions, so that they do not have to be analysed in out-of-competition samples. A differentiation between training and competition period is impossible by means of hair analysis due to the uncertainty of (especially short-term) kinetic considerations related to hair growth. Therefore, the analytical identification of doping relevant substances in hair is not always a sufficient criterion for a doping offence and the identification of stimulants, beta-blockers etc. in hair would be entirely irrelevant. The most interesting target substances are certainly the anabolic agents, because their desired action (enhanced muscle strength) lasts longer than the excretion, leading to sophisticated procedures to circumvent positive analytical results in competition control. Besides the analysis of out-of-competition control samples, the long term detection of steroids in hair could provide complementary information. An analytical approach to the identification of exogenous steroids in hair requires consideration of the presence of many other steroids in the hair matrix interfering the analysis at trace levels, and of a limited chemical stability. The analysis of endogenous steroids in hair appears to be even more complicated, because the possibility of many biotransformation reactions from (into) other precursors (metabolites) has to be taken into account. Precursor substances of anabolic steroids (especially esters as application forms) are very promising analytical targets of hair analysis, because they can only be detected after an exogenous intake. The quantitative evaluation of active parent compounds like testosterone (which is actively involved in physiological processes of hair growth) in hair is still controversial. Clinical applications under reproducible conditions can be useful, but the biovariability of these parameters will probably prevent the definition of acceptable cut-off levels as a criterion of abuse.