Recent advances in capillary microextraction

Journal of Chromatography A

Gionfriddo

Grandy

et al. 2018

Self Cite

Section: A C C E P T E D Mmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and validation of eco-friendly strategies based on thin film microextraction for water analysis

Journal of Chromatography A

Gionfriddo

Grandy

et al. 2018

Self Cite

“…To further facilitate improved sampling and the extraction procedure, several geometries have been developed by coating extraction phases on particles, stir bar and fabric/blade supports. Figure 1 shows the different geometries of SPME technique [2,5] including a) fiber, b) coated-tip (miniaturized fiber with coating length of 150 µm applied to single cell of Allium cepa L) [6], c) arrow (modified fiber) [7,8], d) in-tube [9,10], e) thin film [11], f) 96-blade blade configuration (thin film on a blade support) [12], g) in-tip [13,14], and h) magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) [15]. In comparison to other SPME geometries, thin film microextraction (TFME) (i.e.…”

Section: -Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of geometries and coating materials in solid phase microextraction: Opportunities, limitations, and future perspectives

Alam

Pawliszyn

2017

Analytica Chimica Acta

Self Cite

280

116

The development of new support and geometries of solid phase microextraction (SPME), including metal fiber assemblies, coated-tip, and thin film microextraction (TFME) (i.e. self-supported, fabric and blade supported), as well as their effects on diffusion and extraction rate of analytes were discussed in the current review. Application of main techniques widely used for preparation of a variety of coating materials of SPME, including sol-gel technique, electrochemical and electrospinning methods as well as the available commercial coatings, were presented. Advantages and limitations of each technique from several aspects, such as range of application, biocompatibility, availability in different geometrical configurations, method of preparation, incorporation of various materials to tune the coating properties, and thermal and physical stability, were also investigated. Future perspectives of each technique to improve the efficiency and stability of the coatings were also summarized. Some interesting materials including ionic liquids (ILs), metal organic frameworks (MOFs) and particle loaded coatings were briefly presented.

“…As an alternative to these aforementioned exhaustive methods, solid phase microextraction (SPME), which was introduced by Pawliszyn et al, is a well-known, solvent-less sample preparation technique capable of performing extraction, pre-concentration and sample clean-up in a single step [9]. There are several geometries of SPME including fiber [10,11], coated-tip (miniaturized fiber) [12], in-tube [13] [14] and membrane (blade and fabric support) [15,16] that makes it a robust technique for convenient coupling to different analytical instruments [12,13,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inter-laboratory validation of a thin film microextraction technique for determination of pesticides in surface water samples

Gionfriddo

Rodríguez-Lafuente

et al. 2017

Analytica Chimica Acta

Self Cite

The primary goal of the present study is the inter-laboratory evaluation of a thin film microextraction (TFME) technique to be used as an alternative approach to liquid-liquid extraction (LLE). Polydimethylsiloxane/divinylbenzene (PDMS/DVB) and PDMS/DVB-carbon mesh supported membranes were used for the extraction of 23 targeted pesticides, while a thermal desorption unit (TDU) was employed to transfer these analytes to a GC/MS instrument for separation and detection. After optimization of the most critical parameters, both membranes were capable of achieving limits of detection (LOD) in the low ng L range while demonstrating excellent robustness, withstanding up to 100 extractions/desorption cycles. Furthermore, limits of quantification (LOQ) between 0.025 and 0.50 μg L were achieved for the 23 compounds selected from several classes of pesticides with a wide range of polarities. A wide linear range of 0.025-10.0 μg L with strong correlation to response (R > 0.99) was attained for most of the studied analytes. Both membranes showed good accuracy and repeatability at three levels of concentration. Moreover, the method was also validated through blind split analyses of 18 surface water samples, collected within 3 months, using TFME at the University of Waterloo and LLE at Maxxam Analytics (Mississauga, ON) which is an accredited commercial analytical laboratory. Good agreement between the two methods was achieved with accuracy values ranging from 70 to 130%, for the majority of analytes in the samples collected. At the concentration levels investigated, 90% of the analytes were quantifiable by TFME, whereas only 53% of the compounds were reportable using the LLE method particularly at concentrations lower than 1 μg L. The comparison of TFME and LLE from several analytical aspects demonstrated that the novel TFME method gave similar accuracy to LLE, while providing additional advantages including higher sensitivity, lower sample volume, thus reduced waste production, and faster analytical throughput. Given the sensitivity, simplicity, low cost, accuracy, greenness and relatively fast procedure of TFME, it shows great potential for adoption in analytical laboratories as an alternative to LLE.