论文部分内容阅读
目的对比酸消化、碱消化和未消化3种血砷前处理方法对血砷测定的影响。方法于2010年9月,采集沈阳市某医院4名正在接受砷剂治疗和4名刚刚停用砷剂的白血病患者的血液样品(分别为血样1～4和血样5～8),分别采用酸消化法和碱消化法对样品进行前处理,以氢化物发生-冷阱捕获-原子吸收(HG-cold trap-AAS)法检测血液中总砷(tAs)和各形态砷含量。结果血tAs波动范围为0.91～120.96μg/L。经酸消化、碱消化和未消化后血样中tAs含量间比较,差异无统计学意义(F=0.097,P>0.05)。血iAs波动范围为0.17～69.93μg/L。经酸消化、碱消化和未消化后血样中tAs含量间比较,差异无统计学意义(F=0.097,P>0.05)。碱消化组各样品iAs水平略低于酸消化组和未消化组iAs的值,但差异无统计学意义(F=1.527,P>0.05)。血MMA波动范围为0～78.37μg/L,MMA含量从高到低排序均为未消化组>碱消化组>酸消化组,差异有统计学意义(F=103.751,P<0.01)。进一步两两比较分析后发现各组间差异均有统计学意义(P<0.01)。经酸消化、碱消化法和未消化后全部检出MMA的样品只有4个,均为正在接受砷剂治疗的白血病患者。酸消化血样中均未检出DMA;仅未消化血样3中检出DMA,含量为13.28μg/L;而碱消化血样1～5中检出DMA,含量在1.45～17.91μg/L之间。TMA仅在碱消化血样2中检出,含量为7.19μg/L;未消化和酸消化血样中均未检出TMA。结论血样经酸消化、碱消化和未消化后,均可用于各形态砷的检测,而碱消化更适于各形态砷的检测。
Objective To compare the effects of three pre-treatment methods of blood arsenic, acid digestion, alkaline digestion and undigestion on blood arsenic determination. Methods In September 2010, four blood samples of leukemia patients who were receiving arsenic treatment and four arsenic agents were discontinued (blood samples 1 to 4 and blood samples 5 to 8, respectively) were collected from a hospital in Shenyang City, The samples were pre-treated by digestion and alkaline digestion, and the total arsenic (tAs) and arsenic contents in blood were detected by HG-cold trap-AAS. Results Blood tAs fluctuation ranged from 0.91 to 120.96 μg / L. There was no significant difference in tAs content between acid digestion, alkaline digestion and undigested blood samples (F = 0.097, P> 0.05). Blood iAs fluctuations ranged from 0.17 to 69.93 μg / L. There was no significant difference in tAs content between acid digestion, alkaline digestion and undigested blood samples (F = 0.097, P> 0.05). The levels of iAs in alkaline digestion group were slightly lower than those in acid digestion group and non-digestion group, but the difference was not statistically significant (F = 1.527, P> 0.05). Blood MMA fluctuated in the range of 0-78.37μg / L, MMA content descending order were undigested group> alkaline digestion group> acid digestion group, the difference was statistically significant (F = 103.751, P <0.01). Further comparative analysis showed that there was significant difference among the groups (P <0.01). Only four samples were detected by acid digestion, alkaline digestion and undigested MMA, all of whom were arsenic-treated leukemia patients. No DMA was detected in the acid digested blood sample; only DMA was detected in the undigested blood sample 3, and the content was 13.28μg / L; DMA was detected in alkaline digested blood samples 1-5, with the content ranging from 1.45 to 17.91μg / L. TMA was detected only in alkaline digestion blood sample 2, with a content of 7.19 μg / L; no TMA was detected in undigested and acid digested blood samples. Conclusion The blood samples can be used for the determination of arsenic in various forms after acid digestion, alkaline digestion and undigestion, while alkaline digestion is more suitable for the detection of arsenic in various forms.