Loading…
Comparison of screening methods for antibiotics in beef kidney juice and serum
Rapid screening tests can be used as part of an efficient program designed to monitor veterinary drug residues in cattle. In this work, three rapid tests designed to screen samples for the presence of antibiotic residues, the Fast Antimicrobial Screen Test (FAST), Premi ® and Kidney Inhibition Swab...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Analytica chimica acta 2009-04, Vol.637 (1), p.290-297 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-14108c7e632d6c2c4b5e731d2bbc5545bd04233515cc9e7da83c75d7930f07db3 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-14108c7e632d6c2c4b5e731d2bbc5545bd04233515cc9e7da83c75d7930f07db3 |
| container_end_page | 297 |
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 290 |
| container_title | Analytica chimica acta |
| container_volume | 637 |
| creator | Schneider, Marilyn J. Mastovska, Katerina Lehotay, Steven J. Lightfield, Alan R. Kinsella, Brian Shultz, Craig E. |
| description | Rapid screening tests can be used as part of an efficient program designed to monitor veterinary drug residues in cattle. In this work, three rapid tests designed to screen samples for the presence of antibiotic residues, the Fast Antimicrobial Screen Test (FAST), Premi
® and Kidney Inhibition Swab (KIS™) tests, were compared using beef kidney juice and serum samples. In order to provide a realistic assessment, potentially incurred samples of beef kidney juice and serum were obtained from 235 carcasses which had been retained by inspectors in a processing plant for further testing. In addition, liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) analysis was conducted on these samples to identify what antibiotics were present, if any, and their levels. The comparison of the three rapid screening test results with those from LC–MS/MS analysis allowed for a more complete comparison of the relative sensitivity of these analytical methods, as well as valuable information on false positive and negative response rates. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.aca.2008.08.005 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_896209170</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0003267008014566</els_id><sourcerecordid>33652447</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-14108c7e632d6c2c4b5e731d2bbc5545bd04233515cc9e7da83c75d7930f07db3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp90E2LFDEQBuAgijv78QO8SC6upx4rSafTjScZ1lVY9KLnkK5Ua8bpzph0C_vvTTOD3hYKisBTleJl7JWArQDRvNtvHbqtBGi3a4F-xjaiNaqqlayfsw0AqEo2Bi7YZc778pQC6pfsQnSybaCWG_ZlF8ejSyHHiceBZ0xEU5h-8JHmn9FnPsTE3TSHPsQ5YOZh4j3RwH8FP9Ej3y8BqQDPM6VlvGYvBnfIdHPuV-z7x7tvu0_Vw9f7z7sPDxVqAXMlagEtGmqU9A1KrHtNRgkv-x61rnXvy3FKaaEROzLetQqN9qZTMIDxvbpib097jyn-XijPdgwZ6XBwE8Ul27ZrJHTCQJG3T0qlGi3r2hQoThBTzDnRYI8pjC49WgF2jdvubYnbrnHbtUCXmdfn5Us_kv8_cc63gDdn4DK6w5DchCH_c1KUz6Fb3fuToxLan0DJZgw0IfmQCGfrY3jijL8PMJvY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>33652447</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of screening methods for antibiotics in beef kidney juice and serum</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Schneider, Marilyn J. ; Mastovska, Katerina ; Lehotay, Steven J. ; Lightfield, Alan R. ; Kinsella, Brian ; Shultz, Craig E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Marilyn J. ; Mastovska, Katerina ; Lehotay, Steven J. ; Lightfield, Alan R. ; Kinsella, Brian ; Shultz, Craig E.</creatorcontrib><description>Rapid screening tests can be used as part of an efficient program designed to monitor veterinary drug residues in cattle. In this work, three rapid tests designed to screen samples for the presence of antibiotic residues, the Fast Antimicrobial Screen Test (FAST), Premi
® and Kidney Inhibition Swab (KIS™) tests, were compared using beef kidney juice and serum samples. In order to provide a realistic assessment, potentially incurred samples of beef kidney juice and serum were obtained from 235 carcasses which had been retained by inspectors in a processing plant for further testing. In addition, liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) analysis was conducted on these samples to identify what antibiotics were present, if any, and their levels. The comparison of the three rapid screening test results with those from LC–MS/MS analysis allowed for a more complete comparison of the relative sensitivity of these analytical methods, as well as valuable information on false positive and negative response rates.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-2670</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-4324</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2008.08.005</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19286042</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ACACAM</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Analytical chemistry ; Animals ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - analysis ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - blood ; Antibiotics ; Cattle ; Chemistry ; Chromatographic methods and physical methods associated with chromatography ; Chromatography, Liquid - methods ; Drug Residues - analysis ; Exact sciences and technology ; False Negative Reactions ; False Positive Reactions ; Kidney - chemistry ; Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry ; Microbial inhibition assays ; Microbial Sensitivity Tests - methods ; Other chromatographic methods ; Reagent Kits, Diagnostic ; Screening ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Spectrometric and optical methods ; Tandem Mass Spectrometry - methods</subject><ispartof>Analytica chimica acta, 2009-04, Vol.637 (1), p.290-297</ispartof><rights>2008</rights><rights>2009 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-14108c7e632d6c2c4b5e731d2bbc5545bd04233515cc9e7da83c75d7930f07db3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-14108c7e632d6c2c4b5e731d2bbc5545bd04233515cc9e7da83c75d7930f07db3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>310,311,315,786,790,795,796,23958,23959,25170,27957,27958</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=21652092$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19286042$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Marilyn J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mastovska, Katerina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lehotay, Steven J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lightfield, Alan R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kinsella, Brian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shultz, Craig E.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of screening methods for antibiotics in beef kidney juice and serum</title><title>Analytica chimica acta</title><addtitle>Anal Chim Acta</addtitle><description>Rapid screening tests can be used as part of an efficient program designed to monitor veterinary drug residues in cattle. In this work, three rapid tests designed to screen samples for the presence of antibiotic residues, the Fast Antimicrobial Screen Test (FAST), Premi
® and Kidney Inhibition Swab (KIS™) tests, were compared using beef kidney juice and serum samples. In order to provide a realistic assessment, potentially incurred samples of beef kidney juice and serum were obtained from 235 carcasses which had been retained by inspectors in a processing plant for further testing. In addition, liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) analysis was conducted on these samples to identify what antibiotics were present, if any, and their levels. The comparison of the three rapid screening test results with those from LC–MS/MS analysis allowed for a more complete comparison of the relative sensitivity of these analytical methods, as well as valuable information on false positive and negative response rates.</description><subject>Analytical chemistry</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - analysis</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - blood</subject><subject>Antibiotics</subject><subject>Cattle</subject><subject>Chemistry</subject><subject>Chromatographic methods and physical methods associated with chromatography</subject><subject>Chromatography, Liquid - methods</subject><subject>Drug Residues - analysis</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>False Negative Reactions</subject><subject>False Positive Reactions</subject><subject>Kidney - chemistry</subject><subject>Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry</subject><subject>Microbial inhibition assays</subject><subject>Microbial Sensitivity Tests - methods</subject><subject>Other chromatographic methods</subject><subject>Reagent Kits, Diagnostic</subject><subject>Screening</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Spectrometric and optical methods</subject><subject>Tandem Mass Spectrometry - methods</subject><issn>0003-2670</issn><issn>1873-4324</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp90E2LFDEQBuAgijv78QO8SC6upx4rSafTjScZ1lVY9KLnkK5Ua8bpzph0C_vvTTOD3hYKisBTleJl7JWArQDRvNtvHbqtBGi3a4F-xjaiNaqqlayfsw0AqEo2Bi7YZc778pQC6pfsQnSybaCWG_ZlF8ejSyHHiceBZ0xEU5h-8JHmn9FnPsTE3TSHPsQ5YOZh4j3RwH8FP9Ej3y8BqQDPM6VlvGYvBnfIdHPuV-z7x7tvu0_Vw9f7z7sPDxVqAXMlagEtGmqU9A1KrHtNRgkv-x61rnXvy3FKaaEROzLetQqN9qZTMIDxvbpib097jyn-XijPdgwZ6XBwE8Ul27ZrJHTCQJG3T0qlGi3r2hQoThBTzDnRYI8pjC49WgF2jdvubYnbrnHbtUCXmdfn5Us_kv8_cc63gDdn4DK6w5DchCH_c1KUz6Fb3fuToxLan0DJZgw0IfmQCGfrY3jijL8PMJvY</recordid><startdate>20090401</startdate><enddate>20090401</enddate><creator>Schneider, Marilyn J.</creator><creator>Mastovska, Katerina</creator><creator>Lehotay, Steven J.</creator><creator>Lightfield, Alan R.</creator><creator>Kinsella, Brian</creator><creator>Shultz, Craig E.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090401</creationdate><title>Comparison of screening methods for antibiotics in beef kidney juice and serum</title><author>Schneider, Marilyn J. ; Mastovska, Katerina ; Lehotay, Steven J. ; Lightfield, Alan R. ; Kinsella, Brian ; Shultz, Craig E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-14108c7e632d6c2c4b5e731d2bbc5545bd04233515cc9e7da83c75d7930f07db3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Analytical chemistry</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - analysis</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - blood</topic><topic>Antibiotics</topic><topic>Cattle</topic><topic>Chemistry</topic><topic>Chromatographic methods and physical methods associated with chromatography</topic><topic>Chromatography, Liquid - methods</topic><topic>Drug Residues - analysis</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>False Negative Reactions</topic><topic>False Positive Reactions</topic><topic>Kidney - chemistry</topic><topic>Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry</topic><topic>Microbial inhibition assays</topic><topic>Microbial Sensitivity Tests - methods</topic><topic>Other chromatographic methods</topic><topic>Reagent Kits, Diagnostic</topic><topic>Screening</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Spectrometric and optical methods</topic><topic>Tandem Mass Spectrometry - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schneider, Marilyn J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mastovska, Katerina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lehotay, Steven J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lightfield, Alan R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kinsella, Brian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shultz, Craig E.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Analytica chimica acta</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schneider, Marilyn J.</au><au>Mastovska, Katerina</au><au>Lehotay, Steven J.</au><au>Lightfield, Alan R.</au><au>Kinsella, Brian</au><au>Shultz, Craig E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of screening methods for antibiotics in beef kidney juice and serum</atitle><jtitle>Analytica chimica acta</jtitle><addtitle>Anal Chim Acta</addtitle><date>2009-04-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>637</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>290</spage><epage>297</epage><pages>290-297</pages><issn>0003-2670</issn><eissn>1873-4324</eissn><coden>ACACAM</coden><notes>SourceType-Scholarly Journals-2</notes><notes>ObjectType-Feature-2</notes><notes>ObjectType-Conference Paper-1</notes><notes>content type line 23</notes><notes>SourceType-Conference Papers & Proceedings-1</notes><notes>ObjectType-Article-3</notes><notes>ObjectType-Article-1</notes><notes>SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1</notes><abstract>Rapid screening tests can be used as part of an efficient program designed to monitor veterinary drug residues in cattle. In this work, three rapid tests designed to screen samples for the presence of antibiotic residues, the Fast Antimicrobial Screen Test (FAST), Premi
® and Kidney Inhibition Swab (KIS™) tests, were compared using beef kidney juice and serum samples. In order to provide a realistic assessment, potentially incurred samples of beef kidney juice and serum were obtained from 235 carcasses which had been retained by inspectors in a processing plant for further testing. In addition, liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) analysis was conducted on these samples to identify what antibiotics were present, if any, and their levels. The comparison of the three rapid screening test results with those from LC–MS/MS analysis allowed for a more complete comparison of the relative sensitivity of these analytical methods, as well as valuable information on false positive and negative response rates.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>19286042</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.aca.2008.08.005</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0003-2670 |
| ispartof | Analytica chimica acta, 2009-04, Vol.637 (1), p.290-297 |
| issn | 0003-2670 1873-4324 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_896209170 |
| source | ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | Analytical chemistry Animals Anti-Bacterial Agents - analysis Anti-Bacterial Agents - blood Antibiotics Cattle Chemistry Chromatographic methods and physical methods associated with chromatography Chromatography, Liquid - methods Drug Residues - analysis Exact sciences and technology False Negative Reactions False Positive Reactions Kidney - chemistry Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry Microbial inhibition assays Microbial Sensitivity Tests - methods Other chromatographic methods Reagent Kits, Diagnostic Screening Sensitivity and Specificity Spectrometric and optical methods Tandem Mass Spectrometry - methods |
| title | Comparison of screening methods for antibiotics in beef kidney juice and serum |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-09-30T09%3A22%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20screening%20methods%20for%20antibiotics%20in%20beef%20kidney%20juice%20and%20serum&rft.jtitle=Analytica%20chimica%20acta&rft.au=Schneider,%20Marilyn%20J.&rft.date=2009-04-01&rft.volume=637&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=290&rft.epage=297&rft.pages=290-297&rft.issn=0003-2670&rft.eissn=1873-4324&rft.coden=ACACAM&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.aca.2008.08.005&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E33652447%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c510t-14108c7e632d6c2c4b5e731d2bbc5545bd04233515cc9e7da83c75d7930f07db3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=33652447&rft_id=info:pmid/19286042&rfr_iscdi=true |