Optimization of a New Mass Spectrometry Method for Measurement of Breast Milk Iodine Concentrations and an Assessment of the Effect of Analytic Method and Timing of Within-Feed Sample Collection on Breast Milk Iodine Concentrations

优化用于测量母乳碘浓度的新型质谱方法并评估分析方法和饲料内样品采集时间对母乳碘浓度的影响

阅读:6
作者:Susanne Dold, Jeannine Baumgartner, Christophe Zeder, Adam Krzystek, Jennifer Osei, Max Haldimann, Michael B Zimmermann, Maria Andersson

Background

Breast milk iodine concentration (BMIC) may be an indicator of iodine status during lactation, but there are few data comparing different analytical

Conclusions

Because of poor recoveries, (a) and (b) should not be used to measure BMIC. Compared with (d), (c) has the advantages of higher precision and a lower LOD. In iodine-sufficient women, BMIC shows low variation within a breast-feeding session, so timing of sampling is not a major determinant of BMIC.

Methods

The colorimetric Sandell-Kolthoff method was evaluated with (a) or without (b) alkaline ashing, and ICP-MS was evaluated using a new (129)I isotope ratio approach including Tellurium (Te) for mass bias correction (c) or external standard curve (d). From iodine-sufficient lactating women (n = 97), three samples were collected within one breast-feeding session (fore-, mid-, and hind-feed samples) and BMIC was analyzed using (c) and (d).

Results

Iodine recovery from NIST SRM1549a whole milk powder for methods (a)-(d) was 67%, 24%, 105%, and 102%, respectively. Intra- and inter-assay coefficients of variation for ICP-MS comparing (c) and (d) were 1.3% versus 5.6% (p = 0.04) and 1.1% versus 2.4% (p = 0.33). The limit of detection (LOD) was lower for (c) (0.26 μg/kg) than it was for (d) (2.54 μg/kg; p = 0.02). Using (c), the median [95% confidence interval (CI) obtained by bootstrap] BMIC (μg/kg) in foremilk (179 [CI 161-206]) and in mid-feed milk (184 [CI 160-220]) were not significantly different (p = 0.017), but were higher than in hindmilk (175 [CI 153-216]; p < 0.001). In foremilk using (d), BMIC was 199 ([CI 182-257]; p < 0.001 vs. (c)). The variation in BMIC comparing (c) and (d) (13%) was greater than variation within feeding (5%; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Because of poor recoveries, (a) and (b) should not be used to measure BMIC. Compared with (d), (c) has the advantages of higher precision and a lower LOD. In iodine-sufficient women, BMIC shows low variation within a breast-feeding session, so timing of sampling is not a major determinant of BMIC.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。