The development of selective and biocompatible coatings for solid phase microextraction

Mullett, Wayne M.; Pawliszyn, Janusz

doi:10.1002/jssc.200390031

Cited by 72 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 100 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[1074][1075][1076][1077][1078][1079]1123 Several general reviews on the application of SPE have increasingly discussed MISPE as an emerging technique for highly selective cleanup of samples. [1124][1125][1126][1127][1128][1129] The majority of studies into MISPE have used cartridges or columns off-line from the downstream analytical separation. Often it is easier to optimize for selective binding using organic solvents than aqueous buffers.…”

Section: Solid-phase Extractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Molecular imprinting science and technology: a survey of the literature for the years up to and including 2003

Andersson²,

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over 1450 references to original papers, reviews and monographs have herein been collected to document the development of molecular imprinting science and technology from the serendipitous discovery of Polyakov in 1931 to recent attempts to implement and understand the principles underlying the technique and its use in a range of application areas. In the presentation of the assembled references, a section presenting reviews and monographs covering the area is followed by papers dealing with fundamental aspects of molecular imprinting and the development of novel polymer formats. Thereafter, literature describing attempts to apply these polymeric materials to a range of application areas is presented.

show abstract

Section: Solid-phase Extractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Molecular imprinting science and technology: a survey of the literature for the years up to and including 2003

Andersson²,

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…PDMS coatings are normally appropriate for apolar analytes, while, in contrast, PA is more appropriate for polar analytes. In both PDMS and PA fibers, extraction takes place mainly by means of an absorption process, while for CW/ TPR and PDMS/DVB it is mainly an adsorption process [23] (although in the practice both effects compete). On the other hand, both CW/TPR and PDMS/DVB fibers provided a higher extraction than PDMS or PA, which might be caused by the higher retention capacity of the first two of them, fact that has been already described in the literature [24].…”

Section: Spme Fiber and Experimental Parameters Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple pesticide analysis in wine by MEKC combined with solid‐phase microextraction and sample stacking

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this work, a new method for the determination in white wines of 12 pesticides widely used in vine cultivars (namely, carbendazim, pirimicarb, metalaxyl, pyrimethanil, procymidone, nuarimol, azoxystrobin, tebufenozide, fenarimol, benalaxyl, penconazole, and tetradifon) using solid-phase microextraction (SPME) and MEKC with diode-array detection (DAD) was developed. The MEKC buffer consisted of 100 mM sodium tetraborate and 30 mM SDS at pH 8.5 with 6% v/v 1-propanol. Reversed-electrode polarity stacking mode (REPSM) was applied as on-line preconcentration strategy. In order to carry out an effective and sensitive determination of these pesticides in wine samples, an off-line SPME procedure was optimized by means of an experimental design. After studying the extraction performance of different SPME coatings, PDMS/divinylbenzene (PDMS/DVB) fibers were found the most appropriate for the extraction of most of these pesticides. Carbendazim and metalaxyl could not be extracted from wine samples. Calibration curves for extracted standards and fortified white wines were studied in order to determine the presence of a matrix effect. The combination of both preconcentration procedures (SPME and REPSM) allowed the determination of ten of these pesticides in white wines at concentrations between 0.054 and 0.113 mg/L. (i.e., levels well below the maximum residue limits (MRLs) allowed for these compounds in wine grapes). Ten homemade wines were they analyzed with the optimized method demonstrating the usefulness of the proposed procedure.

show abstract

“…Equilibrium extraction techniques are not included within the scope of this review. We direct those interested in the technique to several recent reviews on the principles and application of SPME [10,11,13] or on emerging SPME technology [14,15].…”

Section: Principles Of Extractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Porous polymer monoliths for extraction: Diverse applications and platforms

Potter

Hilder²

2008

J of Separation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Polymer monoliths are becoming increasingly popular as sorbent materials, and, along with silica monoliths, they are sometimes touted as replacements for the particulate stationary phases used in HPLC. This critical and prospective review shows how polymer monoliths are in fact finding numerous extraction roles that do not resemble HPLC. They are showing great promise as extractors in a remarkable range of platforms, formats and hyphenated systems with functions ranging from chromatographic preconcentration to large-scale preparative extraction. Monolith surface chemistry, morphology and the approaches to monolith synthesis are discussed with regards to these emerging roles.

show abstract

The development of selective and biocompatible coatings for solid phase microextraction

Cited by 72 publications

References 100 publications

Molecular imprinting science and technology: a survey of the literature for the years up to and including 2003

Molecular imprinting science and technology: a survey of the literature for the years up to and including 2003

Multiple pesticide analysis in wine by MEKC combined with solid‐phase microextraction and sample stacking

Porous polymer monoliths for extraction: Diverse applications and platforms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About