Determination and co-estimate of the chlormadinone acetate and 17α-ethinyl estradiol in pharmaceutical formulation and drinking water samples by digital derivative spectophotometry

• CÉSAR SOTO ^[1] ; ROMINA OTIPKA ^[2] ; M. INÉS TORAL ^[2] ; DIEGO PINO ^[2] ; DAVID CONTRERAS ^[1] ; JORGE YÁÑEZ ^[1]
  1. [1] Universidad de Concepción

     Universidad de Concepción

     Comuna de Concepción, Chile

     
  2. [2] Universidad de Chile

     Universidad de Chile

     Santiago, Chile

     
• Localización: Journal of the Chilean Chemical Society (Boletín de la Sociedad Chilena de Química), ISSN-e 0717-6309, ISSN 0366-1644, Vol. 59, Nº. 2, 2014, págs. 2485-2489
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Resumen

  • In this work are presented two methods for the simultaneous determination of 17α-ethinylestradiol (EEL) and chlormadinone acetate (CMA) by second order derivative spectrophotometry. The first analytical method proposed is based in the dissolution and extraction of both drugs in acetonitrile. The solution was directly evaluated by second order derivative spectrophotometry with a smoothing factor of 8,000 and a scale factor of 10,000. The determination of EEL and CMA was carried out to 296,6 and 291.8 nm, respectively. The detection limits (3.3 σ criterion) for EEL and CMA were 6.9 x 10-7 and 9.8 x 10-8 mol/L, respectively. Furthermore, a study of the effect of the excipients containing in the pharmaceutical formulation was included. Polyvidone presents greater tendency to produce interference, but its spectral bands are located between 215 and 240 nm, so these bands do not interferes spectrally in the simultaneous determination of EEL and CMA. Both drugs were extracted from the pharmaceutical formulation with acetonitrile, obtaining a good recovery relative to the nominal content. The second method is a screening method and was applied in fortified drinking water. In this method, drugs were extracted in chloroform, which was then removed with N2 and the residue was redissolved in acetonitrile. Due to the difference in the procedure in relation to the pharmaceutical formulation a new analytical parameters were obtained. For EEL this parameters were very similar to those obtained directly in solution, however these were higher for CMA, which could be attributed to that under these conditions was found a higher standard deviation of the blank. Recoveries of fortified samples were 81.8 ± 1.5% and 101.1 ± 0.73% for EEL and CMA, respectively.