Conclusion
Serum AA concentrations differ with analytical methods but both methods are suitable for AA pattern recognition. TMS is a time-saving alternative to traditional PM under physiological conditions as well as in patients with CHD.
Methods
PM: Sample analysis as above (total run time, ~ 119 min). TMS: Sample analysis by AbsoluteIDQ® p180 kit assay (BIOCRATES Life Sciences AG, Innsbruck, Austria), which employs PITC derivatisation; separation of analytes on a Waters Acquity UHPLC BEH18 C18 reversed-phase column, using water and acetonitrile with 0.1% formic acid as the mobile phases; and quantification on a Triple-Stage Quadrupole tandem mass spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) with electrospray ionisation in the presence of internal standards (total run time, ~ 8 min). Calculation of coefficients of variation (CV) (for precision), intra- and interday accuracies, limits of detection (LOD), limits of quantification (LOQ), and mean concentrations.
Results
Both methods yielded acceptable results with regard to precision (CV < 10% PM, < 20% TMS), accuracies (< 10% PM, < 34% TMS), LOD, and LOQ. For both Fontan patients and controls AA concentrations differed significantly between methods, but patterns yielded overall were parallel.