NWU Institutional Repository

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

dc.contributor.authorDold, Susanne
dc.contributor.authorBaumgartner, Jeannine
dc.contributor.authorOsei, Jennifer
dc.contributor.authorZeder, Christophe
dc.contributor.authorKrzystek, Adam
dc.contributor.researchID24054909 - Baumgartner, Jeannine
dc.contributor.researchID23113456 - Osei, Jennifer
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-15T07:21:38Z
dc.date.available2017-05-15T07:21:38Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.description.abstractBackground: Breast milk iodine concentration (BMIC) may be an indicator of iodine status during lactation, but there are few data comparing different analytical methods or timing of sampling. The aims of this study were: (i) to optimize a new inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) method; and (ii) to evaluate the effect of analytical method and timing of within-feed sample collection on BMIC. Methods: The colorimetric Sandell-Kolthoff method was evaluated with (a) or without (b) alkaline ashing, and ICP-MS was evaluated using a new 129I 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
dc.identifier.citationDold, S. et al. 2016. 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. Thyroid, 26(2):287-295. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/thy.2015.0317]
dc.identifier.issn1050-7256
dc.identifier.issn1557-9077 (Online)
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10394/23061
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1089/thy.2015.0317
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherMary Ann Liebert, Inc
dc.titleOptimization 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
dc.typeArticle

Files