Keywords
iron assessment, plasma, serum, cloud-point extraction, spectrophotometry
iron assessment, plasma, serum, cloud-point extraction, spectrophotometry
Iron level in blood plasma is affected by many physiological and pathological conditions1. Plasma iron is determined in diagnosing hemochromatosis2,3, acute iron poisoning4, active cirrhosis5, or hepatitis6, which lead to increased levels of transferrin, an iron(III)-binding glycoprotein that transports iron in the human body7. Only 0.1% of the total iron is present in the blood plasma2, thus its assessment should be rather sensitive, precise, and rapid.
Iron in plasma/serum is determined by spectrophotometry or atomic-absorption spectroscopy8,9 after the recovery of transferrin-bound iron(III) from acidic solutions using chelatants or detergents10. Highly sensitive and specific though labour-extensive radioisotope11 and immunological12 assays for iron in blood plasma are seldom used due to the need for special equipment and expensive reagents. Spectrophotometric methods are most frequent in clinical practice and based on the formation of iron chelates with bathophenanthroline recommended as a reference method13–15 or its sulfonated analogue14,16, ferrozine17, Ferene S18–20, or Chromazurol S21. However, they are not always sensitive and (e.g. ferrozine) result in overestimation compared to bathophenanthroline22.
We report rapid photometric determination of iron in blood plasma and serum by a simple procedure after the extraction of iron(II) complex with 1-nitroso-2-naphthol into the micellar phase of a nonionic surfactant at the cloud point upon heating.
An Agilent Cary 60 spectrophotometer (USA; optical path length, 1 cm) and an inoLab pH Level 1 pH-meter (Germany) with a glass pH-selective electrode (precision ±5%) were used. Solutions were mixed with a Biosan MMS 3000 automixer with a micro-stirrer. Mass-spectrometry measurements were performed on a quadrupole Agilent 7500c ICP-MS (Germany) in a time-resolved analysis mode. The sample introduction system consisted of a robust Babbington nebulizer with a Scott spray chamber (Agilent Technologies) cooled by a Peltier element (2°C). The data were acquired and processed with ICP-MS ChemStation (version G1834B) software (Agilent Technologies).
A GSO 7765-2000 Russian certified reference sample of Fe(III) (1.00 mg/mL in 0.1 M HCl) was used for calibration. 1-nitroso-2-naphthol (Reakhim, Russia) purified as in 23, ascorbic acid (Fluka, China), neonol (AF-neonol 9–12, Elarum, Russia), sodium and ammonium acetates, HCl, trichloroacetic acid (all from KhimMed, Russia), bathophenanthroline (ReaKhim, Russia), and ethanol (Ferien, Russia) were used.
Buffer solutions (pH 4) were prepared by adding the necessary amount of a 1M sodium acetate solution to 0.1 M hydrochloric acid. Chemically pure chloroform (KomponentReaktive, Russia) pre-washed with water from hydrochloric acid was used as a micellar phase diluent.
Blood samples were provided by 2 healthy volunteers. All tests were made in 3 replicates. To obtain native serum, a sample was put in a clean glass test tube and left for 1 h at room temperature to form a clot. The clot was separated from the walls with a glass tip and the sample was centrifuged for 15 min at 1500 rpm. The resulting serum was transferred into a clean test tube. For the decomposition of the iron(III) complex with transferrin, 0.5 ml of serum/plasma in a glass test tube was mixed with 1 ml of 2M HCl, next, 1 ml of fresh 2.5% ascorbic acid solution was added. The sample was diluted to 5 ml and mixed thoroughly.
A 1 ml portion of the test or a calibration solution is mixed with 1 ml of a 0.001M reagent solution in 5% neonol, 0.5 ml of 1M sodium acetate, and 8.5 ml of 5% neonol in a glass test tube. In the blank, 1 ml of distilled water was added instead of plasma/serum. Solutions were stirred in a boiling water bath for 15 min. Blood proteins denaturise and form a viscous white precipitate in the upper phase. Next, test tubes are cooled for 1 min in a cold-water stream, and the upper phase is removed by decanting. The lower, micellar, phase (0.6 mL) is diluted to 1.5 ml of chloroform and absorbance is measured at 715 nm against the blank.
0.7 ml of the test sample was mixed with 0.1 ml of 1% ascorbic acid, 0.35 ml of 1M HCl, and after stirring, with 0.2 ml of 20% trichloroacetic acid and centrifuged at 1500 rpm. A 0.7-ml supernatant of the reaction mixture is transferred into a test tube, 0.6 ml of saturated ammonium acetate and 0.7 ml of a bathophenanthroline solution in ethanol are added. After 1 min, absorbance is measured at 536 nm against the blank.
The conditions for iron preconcentration with 1-nitroso-2-naphthol into a neonol micellar phase in the cloud point were selected as reported elsewhere24. The iron recovery is 98 ± 2%. The optimum pH range is 4.5–6.3; the limit of detection is 0.03 µg/mL, the determination range is 0.1 – 2.8 µg/mL (RSD 0.02–0.10). The verification of the procedure using the reference protocol (bathophenanthroline) and an independent method (ICP-MS, isotope 54Fe) shows insignificantly different results (Table 1).
Sample | Blood plasma (µg/mL) | RSD | Blood serum (µg/mL) | RSD |
---|---|---|---|---|
CPE procedure | 1.71 ± 0.24 | 0.06 | 1.32 ± 0.17 | 0.05 |
Reference method | 1.74 ± 0.16a | 0.05a | 1.34 ± 0.29b | 0.09b |
The own colour of the reagent does not affect the blank. It is noteworthy that copper(II), existing in significant quantities in plasma and serum25, does not interfere with the determination as the absorbance maximum of copper complex with nitroso-naphthols lies at 430–490 nm. This avoids using toxic and corrosive thioglycolic acid as a masking reagent. In addition, sample procedure provides the denaturisation of proteins and their removal at the stage of phase separation. Finally, the advantage of the proposed procedure over the bathophenanthroline protocol is much higher sensitivity: while the reference protocol assumes the determination at the boundary of the spectrophotometer working range, the results for our procedure correspond to its middle. Moreover, the separation does not exceed 15 min, which is promising for the development of rapid assessment protocols. It is also noteworthy that the extraction occurs under rather soft conditions, and the pH interval of complex formation in the nonionic surfactant is rather wide (ca. 1 pH both in acidic and alkaline ranges).
F1000Research: Dataset 1. Raw dataset for Samarina et al., 2015 'Rapid assessment of iron in blood plasma and serum by spectrophotometry with cloud-point extraction', 10.5256/f1000research.6716.d10075726
MP and TS conceived the study and carried out the research. TS designed the experiments. TS and MP prepared the first draft of the manuscript. All authors have seen and agreed to the final content of the manuscript.
The work is supported by The Russian Science Foundation, grant no. 14-23-00012 (MP).
I confirm that the funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
We are grateful to Agilent Technologies — Russia and its CEO, Dr. Konstantin Evdokimov, for Agilent equipment used in this study. Samples of blood plasma courtesy of Dr. I. F. Seregina (M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University).
Views | Downloads | |
---|---|---|
F1000Research | - | - |
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
|
- | - |
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Invited Reviewers | ||
---|---|---|
1 | 2 | |
Version 1 25 Aug 15 |
read | read |
Click here to access the data.
Spreadsheet data files may not format correctly if your computer is using different default delimiters (symbols used to separate values into separate cells) - a spreadsheet created in one region is sometimes misinterpreted by computers in other regions. You can change the regional settings on your computer so that the spreadsheet can be interpreted correctly.
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list:
Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles
Already registered? Sign in
The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.
You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.
You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.
If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password.
If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance.
Thank you very much for your comment on our paper. I still believe you a bit fast to conclude that the method published in this paper is the ... Continue reading Dear Dr. Filik,
Thank you very much for your comment on our paper. I still believe you a bit fast to conclude that the method published in this paper is the same in terms of the same reagent (NN) and general approach
- Different material: The paper you cite deals with the determination of metals in steel, not in blood with complex protein-based matrix, which moves us from inorganic to organic sample preparation completely changes the process.
- Different iron species: The paper you cite deals with iron(III) chelate of NN, and the authors work at pH 1, while we succeeded in moving to weakly acidic media.
- Different reagent preparation approach: The reagent in the cited paper deals with using 100 mL of dimethyl ether for NN preparation, while we use solubilization of the reagent using neonol, which is significantly different approach.
Probably, you are correct that this paper should be cited in the subsequent versions of the paper.Thank you very much for your comment on our paper. I still believe you a bit fast to conclude that the method published in this paper is the same in terms of the same reagent (NN) and general approach
- Different material: The paper you cite deals with the determination of metals in steel, not in blood with complex protein-based matrix, which moves us from inorganic to organic sample preparation completely changes the process.
- Different iron species: The paper you cite deals with iron(III) chelate of NN, and the authors work at pH 1, while we succeeded in moving to weakly acidic media.
- Different reagent preparation approach: The reagent in the cited paper deals with using 100 mL of dimethyl ether for NN preparation, while we use solubilization of the reagent using neonol, which is significantly different approach.
Probably, you are correct that this paper should be cited in the subsequent versions of the paper.