SCIEX How

SCIEX How is your launchpad for exploration - charting SCIEX technologies with step‑by‑step analytical methods, precise acquisition parameters (MRM/HRMS, source/ion optics), and validated materials lists. Navigate from hypothesis to high‑confidence, reproducible results - faster.

SCIEX How resources

PFAS analysis FAQs

What are the challenges in PFAS analysis?

PFAS analysis is challenging due to ultratrace detection limits, high contamination risk, complex sample matrices, and a rapidly expanding list of regulated and emerging compounds. Reliable workflows must balance sensitivity, robustness, and defensible data quality across methods and matrices.

What are the current regulations and standards for PFAS analysis?

PFAS regulations continue to evolve globally, with formalized methods such as U.S. EPA drinking water methods (such as EPA 533 and 537.1) and comprehensive approaches such as EPA Method 1633 for multiple matrices. Laboratories must stay prepared for expanding compound lists and lower reporting limits.

Which PFAS compounds should I include in my testing panel?

Most testing panels include regulated legacy PFAS while expanding to short‑chain, ultrashort‑chain, and emerging compounds as required by regulations, site‑specific risk, or customer needs. Flexible workflows help laboratories adapt as compound lists grow.

Which method should I use? Is EPA 1633 required?

The appropriate method depends on your sample matrix, regulatory context, and reporting requirements. EPA Method 1633 is widely adopted for multi‑matrix testing, while other EPA methods may be appropriate for specific applications such as drinking water compliance testing.

How do I avoid PFAS contamination in my workflow?

PFAS contamination can arise from labware, solvents, consumables, and sample handling. Using PFAS‑aware workflows, validated materials, and contamination‑control best practices helps minimize background and improve data confidence.

What instruments are best for PFAS analysis?

High‑sensitivity LC‑MS/MS systems are commonly used for routine PFAS quantitation, while high‑resolution mass spectrometry can support screening and confirmation of emerging compounds. Instrument stability, background control, and sensitivity are critical selection factors.

What sample preparation is best for my matrix?

Sample preparation depends on the matrix, target compounds, and detection limits. Options range from direct injection to more extensive cleanup approaches, with the goal of balancing sensitivity, contamination control, and throughput.

How do I deal with short‑chain and ultrashort‑chain PFAS?

Short‑ and ultrashort‑chain PFAS require specialized workflows due to poor retention, high polarity, and background interference. Optimized chromatography and high‑sensitivity detection are key to achieving reliable quantitation.

How do I future‑proof my PFAS method as regulations evolve?

Future‑proofing requires flexible workflows that support expanding analyte lists, lower detection limits, and new matrices. Platforms that adapt to both targeted and broader screening needs help laboratories stay ahead of regulatory change.

How do I speed up data-processing and report generation in my PFAS workflow?

Streamlined data processing tools and integrated workflows reduce manual review, support consistent quantitation, and simplify reporting, helping laboratories improve turnaround time without sacrificing data quality.

What are the main differences between EPA Method 1633 and other PFAS testing methods?

EPA Method 1633 is designed for broad PFAS coverage across multiple matrices, while other EPA methods are more narrowly focused on specific applications such as drinking water. Method selection affects sample prep, compound coverage, and reporting scope.

How do I prepare samples according to EPA Method 1633 for PFAS analysis?

EPA Method 1633 defines standardized preparation and quality requirements that vary by matrix. Laboratories typically implement validated workflows that align with method requirements while optimizing efficiency and contamination control.

What are the most effective tools for analyzing PFAS levels in environmental samples?

Effective PFAS analysis combines sensitive instrumentation, optimized chromatography, reliable sample preparation, and software tools that support confident quantitation and defensible reporting across environmental matrices.