Electrocatalytic determination of reduced glutathione in human erythrocytes

de Cássia Silva Luz, R; Damos, FS; Gandra, PG; de Macedo, DV; Tanaka, AA; Kubota, LT

HERO ID

5182188

Reference Type

Journal Article

Year

2007

Language

English

PMID

17200855

HERO ID 5182188
In Press No
Year 2007
Title Electrocatalytic determination of reduced glutathione in human erythrocytes
Authors de Cássia Silva Luz, R; Damos, FS; Gandra, PG; de Macedo, DV; Tanaka, AA; Kubota, LT
Journal Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry
Volume 387
Issue 5
Page Numbers 1891-1897
Abstract The determination of reduced glutathione (GSH) in human erythrocytes using a simple, fast and sensitive method employing a glassy carbon electrode modified with cobalt tetrasulfonated phthalocyanine (CoTSPc) immobilized in poly(L: -lysine) (PLL) film was investigated. This modified electrode showed very efficient electrocatalytic activity for anodic oxidation of GSH, decreasing substantially the anodic overpotentials for 0.2 V versus Ag/AgCl. The modified electrode presented better performance in 0.1 mol l(-1) piperazine-N,N'-bis(2-ethanesulfonic acid) buffer at pH 7.4. The other experimental parameters, such as the concentration of CoTSPc and PLL in the membrane preparation, pH, type of buffer solution and applied potential, were optimized. Under optimized operational conditions, a linear response from 50 to 2,160 nmol l(-1) was obtained with a high sensitivity of 1.5 nA l nmol(-1) cm(-2). The detection limit for GSH determination was 15 nmol l(-1). The proposed sensor presented good repeatability, evaluated in terms of the relative standard deviation (1.5%) for n = 10. The modified electrode was applied for determination of GSH in erythrocyte samples and the results were in agreement with those obtained by a comparative method described in the literature The average recovery for these fortified samples was 100 +/- 1)%. Applying a paired Student's-t test to compare these methods, we could observe that, at the 95% confidence level, there was no statistical difference between the reference and the proposed methods.
Doi 10.1007/s00216-006-1053-6
Pmid 17200855
Wosid WOS:000244335000036
Is Certified Translation No
Dupe Override No
Is Public Yes
Language Text English