New Psychoactive Substances: Which Biological Matrix Is the Best for Clinical Toxicology Screening?

BACKGROUND

Every year, more new psychoactive substances (NPSs) emerge in the market of the drugs of abuse. NPSs belong to various chemical classes, such as synthetic cannabinoids, phenethylamines, opioids, and benzodiazepines. The detection of NPSs intake using different types of biological matrices is challenging for clinical toxicologists because of their structural diversity and the lack of information on their toxicokinetics, including their metabolic fate.

METHODS

PubMed-listed articles reporting mass spectrometry-based bioanalytical approaches for NPSs detection published during the past 5 years were identified and discussed. Furthermore, the pros and cons of using common biological matrices in clinical toxicology (CT) settings to screen for NPSs are highlighted in this review article.

RESULTS

Twenty-six articles presenting multianalyte screening methods for use in the field of CT were considered. The advantages and disadvantages of different biological matrices are discussed with a particular view of the different analytical tasks in CT, especially emergency toxicology. Finally, an outlook introduces the emerging trends in biosamples used in CT, such as the exhaled breath.

CONCLUSIONS

Blood and urine represent the most common biological matrices used in a CT setting; however, reports concerning NPSs detection in alternative matrices are also available. Noteworthy, the selection of the biological matrix must depend on the clinician's enquiry because the individual advantages and disadvantages must be considered.