Hegazy Maha A, Eissa Maya S, Abd El-Sattar Osama I, Abd El-Kawy Mohamed M
Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Egyptian Russian University, Cairo, Egypt.
Talanta. 2014 Feb;119:170-7. doi: 10.1016/j.talanta.2013.10.022. Epub 2013 Nov 8.
Imidapril hydrochloride (IMD) is a recently developed prodrug-type angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor. Due to its instability under both hydrolytic and oxidative conditions, development of rapid, simple and sensitive methods for its determination in the presence of its possible degradation products is essential. We proposed two simple liquid chromatographic methods associated with ultraviolet detection. The first method is an HPTLC-densitometric one in which separation of IMD from its degradation products was achieved followed by densitometric scanning at 220 nm using silica gel F254 plates and chloroform:ethanol:acetic acid (3:0.5:0.1, v/v/v) as the developing system. The second method was based on RP-HPLC in which the separation was performed using C18 analytical column and isocratic elution system with acetonitrile: 0.15% triethylamine (pH=2.2) (40:60, v/v). The optimum flow rate was 1.5 mL min(-1) and the detection was at 220 nm. Validation was conducted in compliance with the ICH guidelines and the methods were successfully applied for IMD determination in its commercial tablets. The obtained results were statistically compared to those obtained by applying reported HPLC method where no significant difference was found in accordance with accuracy and precision.
盐酸咪达普利(IMD)是一种最近开发的前体药物型血管紧张素转换酶(ACE)抑制剂。由于其在水解和氧化条件下均不稳定,因此开发快速、简便且灵敏的方法以在其可能的降解产物存在的情况下对其进行测定至关重要。我们提出了两种与紫外检测相关的简单液相色谱方法。第一种方法是高效薄层色谱 - 密度测定法,其中实现了IMD与其降解产物的分离,然后使用硅胶F254板和氯仿:乙醇:乙酸(3:0.5:0.1,v/v/v)作为展开系统在220nm处进行密度扫描。第二种方法基于反相高效液相色谱,其中使用C18分析柱和乙腈:0.15%三乙胺(pH = 2.2)(40:60,v/v)的等度洗脱系统进行分离。最佳流速为1.5 mL min⁻¹,检测波长为220nm。按照国际协调会议(ICH)指南进行了方法验证,并且这些方法成功应用于其市售片剂中IMD的测定。将获得的结果与应用报道的高效液相色谱法获得的结果进行统计学比较,根据准确度和精密度未发现显著差异。