Mixed-mode reversed-phase and ion-exchange monolithic columns for micro-HPLC

Pharmaceutical Sciences Research Division, King's College London, London, UK.
Journal of Separation Science (Impact Factor: 2.74). 08/2008; 31(15):2774-83. DOI: 10.1002/jssc.200800124
Source: PubMed


This paper describes the fabrication of RP/ion-exchange mixed-mode monolithic materials for capillary LC. Following deactivation of the capillary surface with 3-(trimethoxysilyl)propyl methacrylate (gamma-MAPS), monoliths were formed by copolymerisation of pentaerythritol diacrylate monostearate (PEDAS), 2-sulphoethyl methacrylate (SEMA) with/without ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (EDMA) within 100 microm id capillaries. In order to investigate the porous properties of the monoliths prepared in our laboratory, mercury intrusion porosimetry, SEM and micro-HPLC were used to measure the monolithic structures. The monolithic columns prepared without EDMA showed bad mechanical stability at high pressure, which is undesirable for micro-HPLC applications. However, it was observed that the small amount (5% w/w) of EDMA clearly improved the mechanical stability of the monoliths. In order to evaluate their application for micro-HPLC, a range of neutral, acidic and basic compounds was separated with these capillaries and satisfactory separations were obtained. In order to further investigate the separation mechanism of these monolithic columns, comparative studies were carried out on the poly(PEDAS-co-SEMA) monolithic column and two other monoliths, poly(PEDAS) and poly(PEDAS-co-2-(methacryloyloxy)ethyl-trimethylammonium methylsulphate (METAM)). As expected, different selectivities were observed for the separation of basic compounds on all three monolithic columns using the same separation conditions. The mobile phase pH also showed clear influence on the retention time of basic compounds. This could be explained by ion-exchange interaction between positively charged analytes and the negatively charged sulphate group.

19 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A novel modified monolithic column with pH-responsive polymer chains was prepared by grafting methacrylic acid onto the poly(glycidyl methacrylate-co-ethylene dimethacrylate) monolith. The grafting polymerization was achieved in an in situ manner which was performed by pumping methacrylic acid directly through an acidic hydrolysis monolithic column using potassium peroxydisulfate initiated free-radical polymerization. The grafted monolithic column was demonstrated to be the pH-responsive to the pore structure and the chromatographic characterization. The permeability of the column and the retention factors of five benzene homologues decreased due to the conformational changes of the polymer chains when the pH of mobile phase increased from 4.5 to 7.5. Furthermore, the modified monolithic column was used as the pH-responsive stationary phase and exhibited an excellent separation of four basic proteins.
    Talanta 09/2009; 79(3):739-45. DOI:10.1016/j.talanta.2009.04.062 · 3.55 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The porous polymer monoliths went a long way since their invention two decades ago. While the first studies applied the traditional polymerization processes at that time well established for the preparation of polymer particles, creativity of scientists interested in the monolithic structures has later led to the use of numerous less common techniques. This review article presents vast variety of methods that have meanwhile emerged. The text first briefly describes the early approaches used for the preparation of monoliths comprising standard free radical polymerizations and includes their development up to present days. Specific attention is paid to the effects of process variables on the formation of both porous structure and pore surface chemistry. Specific attention is also devoted to the use of photopolymerization. Then, several less common free radical polymerization techniques are presented in more detail such as those initiated by gamma-rays and electron beam, the preparation of monoliths from high internal phase emulsions, and cryogels. Living processes including stable free radicals, atom transfer radical polymerization, and ring-opening metathesis polymerization are also discussed. The review ends with description of preparation methods based on polycondensation and polyaddition reactions as well as on precipitation of preformed polymers affording the monolithic materials.
    Journal of Chromatography A 10/2009; 1217(6):902-24. DOI:10.1016/j.chroma.2009.09.073 · 4.17 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A hydrophobic/cation-exchange polymer monolith was prepared via one-step thermally initiated polymerization of 2-acrylamido-2-methyl-1-propyl-sulfonic acid (AMPS), divinylbenzene (DVB) and ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (EDMA) in a capillary. The use of DVB and EDMA as binary crosslinking monomers help to increase the specific surface area and enhance hydrophobicity of the target monolith. The as-obtained monolith was characterized by diffuse reflectance infrared spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy, nitrogen adsorption–desorption and mercury intrusion porosimetry. The results show that the monolith has favorable permeability and well mechanical strength. Furthermore, its specific surface area is up to 353 m2 g−1. The as-prepared monolith was used as a sorbent for polymer monolith microextraction (PMME), which was coupled to high performance liquid chromatographic-electrospray ionization-mass spectrometric (HPLC-ESI-MS) analysis in off-line mode for the determination of antidepressants in biological samples. The results show that the monolith with hydrophobic and strong cation-exchange functional groups exhibits high extraction efficiency towards the antidepressants. The limits of detections (S/N = 3) for the antidepressants in plasma samples were in the range of 0.06–0.39 ng mL−1 and the recoveries were from 73.2% to 110.8% (depending on the analytes), with relative standard deviations (RSDs) less than 9.8%.
    Analytical methods 09/2010; 2(9). DOI:10.1039/c0ay00228c · 1.82 Impact Factor
Show more