Mass spectrometry (MS) is one of the most important analytical techniques to characterize chemical composition. Modern MS techniques are used in a huge variety of labs to measure everything from quality control on single-molecule products to providing information to better understand proteomics and genomics in investigating human health. To shed light on how mass spectrometrists view the current state of this important technology, Lab Manager surveyed over 100 active scientists.

More than 40 percent of respondents have at least 20 years using MS instruments, and more than 70 percent have leadership and decision-making responsibilities in their labs. These scientists come from a wide variety of job functions, industries, and sciences, providing us with a very broad view of how MS is used in modern labs. The top three specific uses of MS from the respondents were material quantitation (62 percent), QA/QC (59 percent), and material identification (53 percent). It is not surprising that analytical chemistry is the most chosen application. Despite the improvements in MS instruments, many organizations still place a majority of the responsibility for MS results in analytical chemistry groups.

Table 1: Applications using MS technologies

Instrument types and desired attributes

To accomplish the range of data needs, different kinds of MS instruments are required. The most common MS instruments are combined with some form of separation. The most common instruments are GC/MS and LC/MS, which is not surprising. The combination of chromatography separation with mass sensitive detection is extremely powerful and very flexible, enabling these tools to deliver for all of the applications listed above. As research grade instruments are used for more downstream applications, we may see these percentages grow as they are used for end uses like QA/QC and diagnostics.

Table 2: MS instrument types used

Respondents reported that the traits they valued most are sensitivity, reliability, ease of use, and mass accuracy. These traits are fundamental to the data integrity of the results. Because MS technology is considered expensive, it is perhaps surprising that traits such as warranty and low operating costs are some of the least valued traits. This may indicate that warranties are only good for the first year, and that operating costs are more related to the samples and projects than directly tied to the instruments. Novelty also finished near the bottom of this list. This is less surprising considering how many MS instruments are used for standard methods and QA/QC where novelty is not a desired trait. 

Due to the importance of MS data, the respondents had clear ideas about further development around MS instruments. The most important wishes from the MS community were common topics of discussion at the American Society for Mass Spectrometry annual conference—higher mass resolution and greater mass accuracy. Despite the very high performance of current instruments, there is still a need for even more powerful ones. Other highly desired developments include greater automation and higher throughput. These developments would benefit both researchers using high-end instruments and labs running standard methods and doing QA/QC measurements. 

Software and support: How OEMs can improve

While MS instruments have gotten easier to use, to train new lab staff on, and to analyze the resulting data, software and ease of use lead the list of concerns related to MS instruments. More powerful and user-friendly software is also the top request when respondents were asked what improvement they’d most like to see for their MS instruments in the future. This is clearly an opportunity for both the original equipment manufacturers (OEM) and for third-party software creators. This is also an opportunity for artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) contributions to make the MS instruments more reliable and the data faster to evaluate, analyze, and process. Fifty-nine percent agree that developments in data analysis software have been critical to the growth of MS, lowering the technique’s barrier to entry such that PhDs or decades of experience are no longer required to gain proficiency. The mass spectrometrists list a variety of data analysis software improvements that help their lab do more MS work. Table 3 shows the top results. 

Other issues cited by the respondents around MS instruments include reliability, service and support, and operating costs. These all provide opportunities for the OEMs to continue to invest in making MS instruments more durable and lower cost to operate. Labs need to explore all their options for managing repair and maintenance, standards, and consumables so that they maximize the use of these expensive assets in affordable ways.

Table 3: Ways that improved software has helped the lab do more MS

Cost remains a primary concern

Despite all of the improvements in MS technology, the number one challenge in using MS in the lab remains the cost of the instruments. Fifty-four percent of the respondents listed the cost of the instruments and the cost of repair and maintenance as the biggest challenges. To help manage the purchase cost of MS instruments, 47 percent of respondents have purchased at least one used instrument. Ultimately, if OEMs wish to expand the MS market, it may warrant reassessing the capital costs for new equipment.