离线呼吸采样方法的系统比较。

IF 3.8 2区 化学 Q1 BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS
Mark Woollam, Andrew Christensen, Eray Schulz, Serenidy Eckerle, Michael D. Davis, Don B. Sanders, Mangilal Agarwal
{"title":"离线呼吸采样方法的系统比较。","authors":"Mark Woollam,&nbsp;Andrew Christensen,&nbsp;Eray Schulz,&nbsp;Serenidy Eckerle,&nbsp;Michael D. Davis,&nbsp;Don B. Sanders,&nbsp;Mangilal Agarwal","doi":"10.1007/s00216-025-06025-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Harnessing the potential of exhaled breath analysis is an emerging frontier in medical diagnostics, given breath is a rich source of volatile organic compound (VOC) biomarkers for different medical conditions. A current downfall in this field, however, is the lack of standardized and widely available methods for offline sampling of exhaled VOCs. Herein, strides are taken toward the standardization of breath sampling in Tedlar bags by exploring several factors that can impact VOC heterogeneity, including tubing material, chemical composition of collection bags, breath fractionation, exhalation volume, and transfer flow rate. After bag-based sampling standardization, performance was benchmarked using two offline breath sampling methods, Tedlar bags and the Respiration Collector for In Vitro Analysis (ReCIVA). Three volunteers from the laboratory with no known respiratory diseases donated ≥ <i>n</i> = 5 samples collected onto adsorption tubes via each method, which were analyzed through thermal desorption (TD) coupled with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC–MS). Data processing revealed a set of 15 highly reliable on-breath VOCs detected across volunteers, and most analytes (except indole) demonstrated higher sensitivity using Tedlar bags. Calculating relative standard deviation (RSD) values showed Tedlar bags were also significantly more reproducible compared to the ReCIVA (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.03). Agreement between the two methods was demonstrated through correlating VOC signals with high statistical significance (<i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.70), indicating both devices are well situated for biomarker discovery applications.</p><h3>Graphical Abstract</h3>\n<div><figure><div><div><picture><source><img></source></picture></div></div></figure></div></div>","PeriodicalId":462,"journal":{"name":"Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry","volume":"417 22","pages":"5061 - 5076"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12402010/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Systematic comparison of methods for offline breath sampling\",\"authors\":\"Mark Woollam,&nbsp;Andrew Christensen,&nbsp;Eray Schulz,&nbsp;Serenidy Eckerle,&nbsp;Michael D. Davis,&nbsp;Don B. Sanders,&nbsp;Mangilal Agarwal\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00216-025-06025-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Harnessing the potential of exhaled breath analysis is an emerging frontier in medical diagnostics, given breath is a rich source of volatile organic compound (VOC) biomarkers for different medical conditions. A current downfall in this field, however, is the lack of standardized and widely available methods for offline sampling of exhaled VOCs. Herein, strides are taken toward the standardization of breath sampling in Tedlar bags by exploring several factors that can impact VOC heterogeneity, including tubing material, chemical composition of collection bags, breath fractionation, exhalation volume, and transfer flow rate. After bag-based sampling standardization, performance was benchmarked using two offline breath sampling methods, Tedlar bags and the Respiration Collector for In Vitro Analysis (ReCIVA). Three volunteers from the laboratory with no known respiratory diseases donated ≥ <i>n</i> = 5 samples collected onto adsorption tubes via each method, which were analyzed through thermal desorption (TD) coupled with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC–MS). Data processing revealed a set of 15 highly reliable on-breath VOCs detected across volunteers, and most analytes (except indole) demonstrated higher sensitivity using Tedlar bags. Calculating relative standard deviation (RSD) values showed Tedlar bags were also significantly more reproducible compared to the ReCIVA (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.03). Agreement between the two methods was demonstrated through correlating VOC signals with high statistical significance (<i>R</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.70), indicating both devices are well situated for biomarker discovery applications.</p><h3>Graphical Abstract</h3>\\n<div><figure><div><div><picture><source><img></source></picture></div></div></figure></div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":462,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry\",\"volume\":\"417 22\",\"pages\":\"5061 - 5076\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12402010/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"92\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00216-025-06025-5\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00216-025-06025-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

利用呼出气体分析的潜力是医学诊断的新兴前沿,因为呼吸是不同医疗条件下挥发性有机化合物(VOC)生物标志物的丰富来源。然而,目前该领域的一个问题是缺乏标准化和广泛可用的离线采样方法。本文通过探讨影响挥发性有机化合物(VOC)异质性的几个因素,包括管道材料、收集袋的化学成分、呼吸分馏、呼出气量和传输流量,朝着telar袋呼气采样的标准化迈出了一步。在基于袋的采样标准化之后,使用两种离线呼吸采样方法,Tedlar袋和体外分析呼吸收集器(recciva)对性能进行基准测试。来自实验室的3名无已知呼吸道疾病的志愿者捐赠≥n = 5份样品,通过每种方法采集到吸附管上,通过热解吸(TD)和气相色谱-质谱(GC-MS)分析。数据处理显示,在志愿者中检测到15种高度可靠的呼气挥发性有机化合物,大多数分析物(除了吲哚)使用泰德勒袋显示出更高的灵敏度。计算相对标准偏差(RSD)值显示,与recva相比,Tedlar袋的可重复性也显著提高(p 2 = 0.70),这表明两种设备都适用于生物标志物发现应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Systematic comparison of methods for offline breath sampling

Systematic comparison of methods for offline breath sampling

Systematic comparison of methods for offline breath sampling

Systematic comparison of methods for offline breath sampling

Harnessing the potential of exhaled breath analysis is an emerging frontier in medical diagnostics, given breath is a rich source of volatile organic compound (VOC) biomarkers for different medical conditions. A current downfall in this field, however, is the lack of standardized and widely available methods for offline sampling of exhaled VOCs. Herein, strides are taken toward the standardization of breath sampling in Tedlar bags by exploring several factors that can impact VOC heterogeneity, including tubing material, chemical composition of collection bags, breath fractionation, exhalation volume, and transfer flow rate. After bag-based sampling standardization, performance was benchmarked using two offline breath sampling methods, Tedlar bags and the Respiration Collector for In Vitro Analysis (ReCIVA). Three volunteers from the laboratory with no known respiratory diseases donated ≥ n = 5 samples collected onto adsorption tubes via each method, which were analyzed through thermal desorption (TD) coupled with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC–MS). Data processing revealed a set of 15 highly reliable on-breath VOCs detected across volunteers, and most analytes (except indole) demonstrated higher sensitivity using Tedlar bags. Calculating relative standard deviation (RSD) values showed Tedlar bags were also significantly more reproducible compared to the ReCIVA (p < 0.03). Agreement between the two methods was demonstrated through correlating VOC signals with high statistical significance (R2 = 0.70), indicating both devices are well situated for biomarker discovery applications.

Graphical Abstract

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
4.70%
发文量
638
审稿时长
2.1 months
期刊介绍: Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry’s mission is the rapid publication of excellent and high-impact research articles on fundamental and applied topics of analytical and bioanalytical measurement science. Its scope is broad, and ranges from novel measurement platforms and their characterization to multidisciplinary approaches that effectively address important scientific problems. The Editors encourage submissions presenting innovative analytical research in concept, instrumentation, methods, and/or applications, including: mass spectrometry, spectroscopy, and electroanalysis; advanced separations; analytical strategies in “-omics” and imaging, bioanalysis, and sampling; miniaturized devices, medical diagnostics, sensors; analytical characterization of nano- and biomaterials; chemometrics and advanced data analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信