Comparison of solid phase extraction methods for the measurement of humic-like substances (HULIS) in atmospheric particles

2020 ◽  
Vol 225 ◽  
pp. 117370
Author(s):  
Chunlin Zou ◽  
Meiju Li ◽  
Tao Cao ◽  
Mengbo Zhu ◽  
Xingjun Fan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Solid Phase Extraction ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Extraction Methods ◽  
Atmospheric Particles ◽  
Phase Extraction

scholarly journals NanoMIP-Based Solid Phase Extraction of Fluoroquinolones from Human Urine: A Proof-of-Concept Study

Separations ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (11) ◽  
pp. 226
Author(s):  
Matteo Chiarello ◽  
Laura Anfossi ◽  
Simone Cavalera ◽  
Fabio Di Di Nardo ◽  
Thea Serra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Solid Phase Extraction ◽  
Human Urine ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Extraction Methods ◽  
Hplc Method ◽  
Limited Attention ◽  
Preliminary Treatment ◽  
Phase Extraction ◽  
Proof Of Concept ◽  
Binding Behavior

NanoMIPs that are prepared by solid phase synthesis have proven to be very versatile, but to date only limited attention has been paid to their use in solid phase extraction. Thus, since nanoMIPs show close similarities, in terms of binding behavior, to antibodies, it seems relevant to verify if it is possible to use them as mimics of the natural antibodies that are used in immunoextraction methods. As a proof-of-concept, we considered prepared nanoMIPs against fluoroquinolone ciprofloxacin. Several nanoMIPs were prepared in water with polymerization mixtures of different compositions. The polymer with the highest affinity towards ciprofloxacin was then grafted onto a solid support and used to set up a solid phase extraction–HPLC method with fluorescence detection, for the determination of fluoroquinolones in human urine. The method resulted in successful selection for the fluoroquinolone antibiotics, such that the nanoMIPs were suitable for direct extraction of the antibiotics from the urine samples at the µg mL−1 level. They required no preliminary treatment, except for a 1 + 9 (v/v) dilution with a buffer of pH 4.5 and they had good analyte recovery rates; up to 85% with precision in the range of 3 to 4.5%, without interference from the matrix. These experimental results demonstrate, for the first time, the feasibility of the use of nanoMIPs to develop solid phase extraction methods.

scholarly journals Modern Approaches to Preparation of Body Fluids for Determination of Bioactive Compounds

Separations ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Madej ◽  
Wojciech Piekoszewski
Keyword(s):  
Liquid Phase ◽  
Solid Phase Extraction ◽  
Bioactive Compounds ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Magnetic Solid Phase Extraction ◽  
Extraction Methods ◽  
Body Fluids ◽  
Phase Extraction ◽  
Modern Approach ◽  
Dispersive Liquid Liquid Microextraction

The current clinical and forensic toxicological analysis of body fluids requires a modern approach to sample preparation characterized by high selectivity and enrichment capability, suitability for micro-samples, simplicity and speed, and the possibility of automation and miniaturization, as well as the use of small amounts of reagents, especially toxic solvents. Most of the abovementioned features may be realized using so-called microextraction techniques which cover liquid-phase techniques (e.g., single-drop microextraction, SDME; dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction, DLLME; hollow-fiber liquid-phase microextraction, HF-LPME) and solid-phase extraction techniques (solid-phase microextraction, SPME; microextraction in packed syringes, MEPS; disposable pipette tip extraction, DPX; stir bar sorption extraction, SBSE). Some other extraction methodologies like dispersive solid-phase extraction (d-SPE) or magnetic solid-phase extraction (MSPE) can also be easily miniaturized. This review briefly describes and characterizes the abovementioned extraction methods, and then presents their current applications to the preparation of body fluids analyzed for bioactive compounds in combination with appropriate analytical methods, mainly chromatographic and related techniques. The perspectives of the analytical area we are interested in are also indicated.

scholarly journals Comparison of Solid-Phase Extraction and Micro-Solid-Phase Extraction for Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Pesticides in Water Samples

2003 ◽  
Vol 86 (5) ◽  
pp. 941-946 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giorgio Famiglini ◽  
Helga Trufelli ◽  
Elisabetta Pierini ◽  
Elisa De Simoni ◽  
Filippo Mangani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Liquid Chromatography ◽  
Solid Phase Extraction ◽  
Ion Trap ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Signal To Noise Ratio ◽  
Extraction Methods ◽  
Graphitized Carbon Black ◽  
Mass Spectrometry Analysis ◽  
Phase Extraction ◽  
Spectrometry Analysis

Abstract Our recent on-line solid-phase extraction (SPE) device for micro-liquid chromatography, known as micro-solid-phase extraction (μSPE), was compared with traditional SPE for the analysis, from aqueous samples, of 4 pesticides belonging to different classes. Two different kinds of adsorbents, C18 and graphitized carbon black, were tested. A 2-stage ion trap mass spectrometer, equipped with homemade microflow electrospray ion (ESI) source, was used. Detection limits with a signal-to-noise ratio of 3:1 for both extraction methods were in the range of 0.1 μg/L for all compounds. However, better recoveries were obtained when μSPE traps were used.

ChemInform Abstract: Biosorption: A New Rise for Elemental Solid Phase Extraction Methods

ChemInform ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 42 (50) ◽  
pp. no-no
Author(s):  
Pablo H. Pacheco ◽  
Raul A. Gil ◽  
Soledad E. Cerutti ◽  
Patricia Smichowski ◽  
Luis D. Martinez
Keyword(s):  
Solid Phase Extraction ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Extraction Methods ◽  
Phase Extraction ◽  
Elemental Solid

scholarly journals A COMPARISON OF SOLID-PHASE EXTRACTION METHODS FOR BISPHENOL A IN CHEESE SAMPLES

2021 ◽  
pp. 848-858
Author(s):  
Cemil KÜREKÇİ ◽  
Sait TAN ◽  
Ali ARSLAN ◽  
Sara Betül ÖZGEN ◽  
Fatih SAKİN
Keyword(s):  
Bisphenol A ◽  
Solid Phase Extraction ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Extraction Methods ◽  
Phase Extraction

UPLC-HRMS and NMR applied in the evaluation of solid-phase extraction methods as a rational strategy of dereplication of Phyllanthus spp. aiming at the discovery of cytotoxic metabolites

2019 ◽  
Vol 1120 ◽  
pp. 51-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Francilene Souza Silva ◽  
Lorena Mara A. Silva ◽  
Amanda Lemos Quintela ◽  
André Gonzaga dos Santos ◽  
Francisca Aliny Nunes Silva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Solid Phase Extraction ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Extraction Methods ◽  
Phase Extraction

Efficiency evaluation of extraction methods of selected benzodiazepine derivatives from human serum and whole blood and the reactivity phenomenon in immunoassay for benzodiazepines

2016 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-114
Author(s):  
Barbara Potocka-Banaś ◽  
Teresa Dembińska ◽  
Krzysztof Borowiak
Keyword(s):  
Solid Phase Extraction ◽  
Whole Blood ◽  
Solid Phase ◽  
Extraction Methods ◽  
Cross Reactivity ◽  
Liquid Extraction ◽  
Array Detector ◽  
Phase Extraction ◽  
Liquid Liquid Extraction ◽  
Benzodiazepine Derivatives

The aim of the study was to compare efficiency of various extraction methods of benzodiazepine derivatives: diazepam, estazolam, flunitrazepam and nitrazepam. The study compared the recovery of benzodiazepines isolated from biological material (blood and human blood serum) using liquid-liquid extraction and solid-phase extraction. The efficiency of each extraction was evaluated using high-performance liquid chromatography with diode array detector. In addition, benzodiazepines immunoassay reactivity was estimated. The following methods of extraction were used: liquid-liquid extraction (a classical liquid-liquid extraction and microextraction), solid- -phase extraction (Baker’s columns and United Chemical Technologies’ (UTC columns). The reactivity was evaluated using V-Twin System with EMIT technology by Siemens. The results showed that the lowest recovery (nitrazepam – 16%, diazepam – 23%, flunitrazepam – 28%, estazolam – 37%) was obtained using liquid-liquid microextraction of whole blood and the highest recovery was obtained in solid-phase extraction of whole blood using United Chemical Technologies’ columns (nitrazepam – 86%, diazepam – 89%, estazolam – 91%, flunitrazepam – 94%). The lowest recovery in classical liquid-liquid extraction was obtained for diazepam isolated from whole blood (36%), and the highest – for flunitrazepam isolated from serum (74%). Solid-phase extraction with Baker’s columns was successful only in case of drugs isolation from serum and the recovery range from 57% to 89% for flunitrazepam. The results indicated higher efficiency of solid-phase extraction, especially with use of columns specific for the extraction of benzodiazepines. The immunoassay analysis showed a decreased reactivity of the tested benzodiazepine derivatives on the reagent used for the EMIT assay. Comparative analysis of the recovery efficiency of selected benzodiazepine derivatives led to the conclusion that use of solid-phase extraction should be considered more often in routine toxicological analysis. The knowledge of benzodiazepine derivatives cross-reactivity in immunoassay method is essential for correct interpretation of obtained results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document