Misidentification of ethyl chloride in the routine GC-FID analysis for alcohol

Georgi Tarnovski, Takeshi Hayashi, Kazuo Igarashi, Hiroshi Ochi, Ryoji Matoba

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

GC-FID is the method of choice for alcohol screening and quantitative analysis in modern forensic medical practice. Although specific enough for routine use, some results could be misleading. In the current article we present a case of sexual asphyxia with drug and volatile substance abuse. Toxicological analysis revealed the presence of methamphetamine at a concentration of 1.3μ g/mL in blood. An ethanol-like peak was detected during our routine GC-FID test for alcohol (methylethylketone IS). Subsequent GC-MS analysis identified the peak as ethyl chloride. Levels of 0.05 mg/mL in blood and 0.01 mg/mL in urine were measured. Two facts proved misleading in our case. First: very small difference of 0.027 between the ethyl chloride and ethanol peaks in relative retention times at the GC-FID chromatograms. Second: missing evidence for the use of ethyl chloride at the scene-neither cans of the substance were found, nor such information was available otherwise. Conclusion: there is a substantial risk for mistaking ethyl chloride for ethanol, when ethyl chloride abuse is unanticipated. In the case of slightest uncertainty a GC-MS analysis should be employed to reliably determine the actual substance.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)e7
JournalForensic Science International
Volume188
Issue number1-3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-07-2009

Fingerprint

Ethyl Chloride
Alcohols
Ethanol
Methamphetamine
Asphyxia
Toxicology
Uncertainty
Substance-Related Disorders
Urine
Pharmaceutical Preparations

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine

Cite this

Tarnovski, Georgi ; Hayashi, Takeshi ; Igarashi, Kazuo ; Ochi, Hiroshi ; Matoba, Ryoji. / Misidentification of ethyl chloride in the routine GC-FID analysis for alcohol. In: Forensic Science International. 2009 ; Vol. 188, No. 1-3. pp. e7.
@article{5ac767548517471192160d9b91a09ff6,
title = "Misidentification of ethyl chloride in the routine GC-FID analysis for alcohol",
abstract = "GC-FID is the method of choice for alcohol screening and quantitative analysis in modern forensic medical practice. Although specific enough for routine use, some results could be misleading. In the current article we present a case of sexual asphyxia with drug and volatile substance abuse. Toxicological analysis revealed the presence of methamphetamine at a concentration of 1.3μ g/mL in blood. An ethanol-like peak was detected during our routine GC-FID test for alcohol (methylethylketone IS). Subsequent GC-MS analysis identified the peak as ethyl chloride. Levels of 0.05 mg/mL in blood and 0.01 mg/mL in urine were measured. Two facts proved misleading in our case. First: very small difference of 0.027 between the ethyl chloride and ethanol peaks in relative retention times at the GC-FID chromatograms. Second: missing evidence for the use of ethyl chloride at the scene-neither cans of the substance were found, nor such information was available otherwise. Conclusion: there is a substantial risk for mistaking ethyl chloride for ethanol, when ethyl chloride abuse is unanticipated. In the case of slightest uncertainty a GC-MS analysis should be employed to reliably determine the actual substance.",
author = "Georgi Tarnovski and Takeshi Hayashi and Kazuo Igarashi and Hiroshi Ochi and Ryoji Matoba",
year = "2009",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.02.008",
language = "English",
volume = "188",
pages = "e7",
journal = "Forensic Science International",
issn = "0379-0738",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "1-3",

}

Misidentification of ethyl chloride in the routine GC-FID analysis for alcohol. / Tarnovski, Georgi; Hayashi, Takeshi; Igarashi, Kazuo; Ochi, Hiroshi; Matoba, Ryoji.

In: Forensic Science International, Vol. 188, No. 1-3, 01.07.2009, p. e7.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Misidentification of ethyl chloride in the routine GC-FID analysis for alcohol

AU - Tarnovski, Georgi

AU - Hayashi, Takeshi

AU - Igarashi, Kazuo

AU - Ochi, Hiroshi

AU - Matoba, Ryoji

PY - 2009/7/1

Y1 - 2009/7/1

N2 - GC-FID is the method of choice for alcohol screening and quantitative analysis in modern forensic medical practice. Although specific enough for routine use, some results could be misleading. In the current article we present a case of sexual asphyxia with drug and volatile substance abuse. Toxicological analysis revealed the presence of methamphetamine at a concentration of 1.3μ g/mL in blood. An ethanol-like peak was detected during our routine GC-FID test for alcohol (methylethylketone IS). Subsequent GC-MS analysis identified the peak as ethyl chloride. Levels of 0.05 mg/mL in blood and 0.01 mg/mL in urine were measured. Two facts proved misleading in our case. First: very small difference of 0.027 between the ethyl chloride and ethanol peaks in relative retention times at the GC-FID chromatograms. Second: missing evidence for the use of ethyl chloride at the scene-neither cans of the substance were found, nor such information was available otherwise. Conclusion: there is a substantial risk for mistaking ethyl chloride for ethanol, when ethyl chloride abuse is unanticipated. In the case of slightest uncertainty a GC-MS analysis should be employed to reliably determine the actual substance.

AB - GC-FID is the method of choice for alcohol screening and quantitative analysis in modern forensic medical practice. Although specific enough for routine use, some results could be misleading. In the current article we present a case of sexual asphyxia with drug and volatile substance abuse. Toxicological analysis revealed the presence of methamphetamine at a concentration of 1.3μ g/mL in blood. An ethanol-like peak was detected during our routine GC-FID test for alcohol (methylethylketone IS). Subsequent GC-MS analysis identified the peak as ethyl chloride. Levels of 0.05 mg/mL in blood and 0.01 mg/mL in urine were measured. Two facts proved misleading in our case. First: very small difference of 0.027 between the ethyl chloride and ethanol peaks in relative retention times at the GC-FID chromatograms. Second: missing evidence for the use of ethyl chloride at the scene-neither cans of the substance were found, nor such information was available otherwise. Conclusion: there is a substantial risk for mistaking ethyl chloride for ethanol, when ethyl chloride abuse is unanticipated. In the case of slightest uncertainty a GC-MS analysis should be employed to reliably determine the actual substance.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=67349214714&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=67349214714&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.02.008

DO - 10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.02.008

M3 - Article

C2 - 19321278

AN - SCOPUS:67349214714

VL - 188

SP - e7

JO - Forensic Science International

JF - Forensic Science International

SN - 0379-0738

IS - 1-3

ER -