SIMPLE MEASUREMENT OF TESTOSTERONE IN MALE SALIVA SAMPLES USING DISPERSIVE LIQUID–LIQUID MICROEXTRACTION FOLLOWED BY LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY–TANDEM MASS SPECTROMETRY DETECTION

Current methods for stress marker detection in saliva

•

Introduction of relevant biomarkers in stress conditions.

•

Reference ranges of biomarkers in normal conditions.

•

Saliva as easy-accessible specimen.

•

Review of analytical methods for biomarker determination in saliva.

•

Possibilities for design of point-of-care devices.

Stress and stress-related diseases are leading to drastic consequences in private and professional life. Therefore, the need for stress prevention strategies is of personal and economic interest. Especially during the recent period related to covid-19 outbreak and lock-down, an ongoing discussion of increasing stress etiology is reported. Biomarker analysis may help to assist diagnosis and classification of stress-related diseases and therefore support therapeutical decisions. Due to its non-invasive sampling, the analysis of saliva has become highly attractive compared to the detection methods in other specimen. This review article summarizes the status of research, innovative approaches, and trends. Scientific literature published since 2011 was excerpted with concentration on the detection of up to seven promising marker substances. Most often reported cortisol represents the currently best evaluated stress marker, while norepinephrine (noradrenaline) or its metabolite 3-methoxy-4-hydroxyphenylglycol is also a quite commonly considered stress marker. Other complementary stress marker candidates are testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) and its sulfonated analogue DHEA-S, alpha-amylase, secretory immunoglobulin A, and chromogranin A. Several working groups are researching in the field of stress marker detection to develop reliable, fast, and affordable methods. Analytical methods reported mainly focused on immunological and electrochemical as well as chromatographic methods hyphenated to mass spectrometric detection to yield the required detection limits.

Miniaturized sample preparation methods for saliva analysis

Saliva, as the first body fluid encountering with the exogenous materials, has good correlation with blood and plays an important role in bioanalysis. However, saliva has not been studied as much as the other biological fluids mainly due to restricted access to its large volumes. In recent years, there is a growing interest for saliva analysis owing to the emergence of miniaturized sample preparation methods. The purpose of this paper is to review all microextraction methods and their principles of operation. In the following, we examine the methods used to analyze saliva up to now and discuss the potential of the other microextraction methods for saliva analysis to encourage research groups for more focus on this important subject area.

Application of a surfactant-assisted dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction method along with central composite design for micro-volume based spectrophotometric determination of low level of Cr(VI) ions in aquatic samples

A fast, simple, low cost surfactant-assisted dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction method along with central composite design for the determination of low level of Cr(VI) ions in several aquatic samples has been developed. Initially, Cr(VI) ions present in the aqueous sample were readily reacted with 1,5‑diphenylcarbazide (DPC) in acidic medium through complexation. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), as an anionic surfactant, was then employed as an ion-pair agent to convert the cationic complex into the neutral one. Following on, the whole aqueous phase underwent a dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (DLLME) leading to the transfer of the neutral complex into the fine droplet of organic extraction phase. A micro-volume spectrophotometer was used to determine Cr(VI) concentrations. Under the optimized conditions predicted by the statistical design, the limit of quantification (LOQ) obtained was reported to be 5.0 μg/L, and the calibration curve was linear over the concentration range of 5-100 μg/L. Finally, the method was successfully implemented for the determination of low levels of Cr(VI) ions in various real aquatic samples and the accuracies fell within the range of 83-102%, while the precision varied in the span of 1.7-5.2%.