Gröschl Michael, Rauh Manfred
Department of Pediatrics, University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany.
Steroids. 2006 Dec;71(13-14):1097-100. doi: 10.1016/j.steroids.2006.09.007. Epub 2006 Oct 27.
Saliva analysis is an accepted non-invasive alternative to plasma in pediatric endocrinology. Although commercial saliva collectors are available, the reliability of these devices for the analysis of salivary hormones has not been proved. We investigated the recovery and linearity of salivary steroids (cortisol, cortisone, 17-hyroxyprogesterone, testosterone, androstenedione) being relevant in endocrine research and therapy control. Pooled saliva was spiked with ascending concentrations of the steroids and applied onto a variety of absorbents, such as the cotton and the polyester (PE) Salivette (Sarstedt), the foam-tip applicator (Whatman) and strips of blood-spot collection paper (Whatman). Analysis was performed by LC-MS/MS. Best results were achieved using the PE Salivette, yielding recoveries (%) of 99.8 (cortisol), 98.7 (cortisone), 91.8 (17OHP), 96.3 (testosterone), 98.9 (androstendione) with a volume recovery of 98+/-1%. Using the blood-spot paper, recoveries (%) were 92.0 (cortisol), 89.1 (cortisone), 72.0 (17OHP), 70.3 (testosterone) and 77.1 (androstendione). The recovery of glucocorticoids was significantly higher compared to androgens (p<0.001). The recovery of liquid volume was 95+/-2%. The cotton Salivette yielded weak recoveries of 88.7 (cortisol), 86.2 (cortisone), 60.9 (17OHP), 62.0 (testosterone) and 72.4 (androstendione). The recovery of the glucocorticoids differed significantly from the androgens (p<0.001). Liquid recovery was most variable with 89+/-8%. The weakest recoveries were found in the foam-tips being 76.2 for cortisol, only 41.8 for cortisone, 31.1 for 17OHP, 38.5 for testosterone and 36.1 for androstendione. The volume recovery here was 97+/-1%. We assume only the PE version of the Salivette suitable for salivary steroid analysis. The weak recovery from the cotton version is a severe problem due to lacking comparability with values obtained with the polyester wads and the weak homogeneity as observed over a physiological concentration range.
唾液分析是儿科内分泌学中一种被认可的、可替代血浆检测的非侵入性方法。尽管市面上有商用唾液采集器,但这些设备用于分析唾液激素的可靠性尚未得到证实。我们研究了唾液类固醇(皮质醇、可的松、17-羟孕酮、睾酮、雄烯二酮)在内分泌研究和治疗控制中的回收率及线性关系。将不同浓度的类固醇添加到混合唾液中,然后应用于多种吸收剂上,如棉质和聚酯(PE)唾液采集管(赛多利斯公司)、泡沫头涂抹器(沃特曼公司)以及血斑采集试纸条(沃特曼公司)。采用液相色谱-串联质谱法进行分析。使用PE唾液采集管获得的结果最佳,皮质醇回收率(%)为99.8,可的松为98.7,17-羟孕酮为91.8,睾酮为96.3,雄烯二酮为98.9,体积回收率为98±1%。使用血斑试纸条时,皮质醇回收率(%)为92.0,可的松为89.1,17-羟孕酮为72.0,睾酮为70.3,雄烯二酮为77.1。糖皮质激素的回收率显著高于雄激素(p<0.001)。液体体积回收率为95±2%。棉质唾液采集管的回收率较低,皮质醇为88.7,可的松为86.2,17-羟孕酮为60.9,睾酮为62.0,雄烯二酮为72.4。糖皮质激素的回收率与雄激素有显著差异(p<0.001)。液体回收率变化最大,为89±8%。在泡沫头涂抹器中回收率最低,皮质醇为76.2,可的松仅为41.8,17-羟孕酮为31.1,睾酮为38.5,雄烯二酮为36.1。此处的体积回收率为97±1%。我们认为只有PE版唾液采集管适用于唾液类固醇分析。棉质版回收率低是一个严重问题,因为与聚酯棉团获得的值缺乏可比性,且在生理浓度范围内观察到均匀性较差。