Advanced

Supported liquid membranes in hollow fiber liquid-phase microextraction (LPME) - Practical considerations in the three-phase mode

Bårdstu, Kari Folde; Ho, Tung Si; Rasmussen, Knut Einar; Pedersen-Bjergaard, Stig and Jönsson, Jan Åke LU (2007) In Journal of Separation Science 30(9). p.1364-1370
Abstract
In this work, three-phase liquid-phase microextraction (LPME) based on a supported liquid membrane (SLM) sustained in the wall of a hollow fiber was investigated with special focus on optimization of the experimental procedures in terms of recovery and repeatability. Recovery data for doxepin, amitriptyline, clomipramine, and mianserin were in the range of 67.8-79.8%. Within-day repeatability data for the four basic drugs were in the range of 4.1-7.7%. No single factor was found to be responsible for these variations, and the variability was caused by several factors related to the LPME extractions as well as to the final HPLC determination. Although the volume of the SLM varied within 0.4-3.1% RSD depending on the preparation procedure,... (More)
In this work, three-phase liquid-phase microextraction (LPME) based on a supported liquid membrane (SLM) sustained in the wall of a hollow fiber was investigated with special focus on optimization of the experimental procedures in terms of recovery and repeatability. Recovery data for doxepin, amitriptyline, clomipramine, and mianserin were in the range of 67.8-79.8%. Within-day repeatability data for the four basic drugs were in the range of 4.1-7.7%. No single factor was found to be responsible for these variations, and the variability was caused by several factors related to the LPME extractions as well as to the final HPLC determination. Although the volume of the SLM varied within 0.4-3.1% RSD depending on the preparation procedure, and the volume of the acceptor solution varied within 4.8% RSD, both recoveries and repeatability were found to be relative insensitive to these variations. Thus, the handling of microliters of liquid in LPME was not a very critical factor, and the preparation of the SLM was accomplished in several different ways with comparable performance. Reuse of hollow fibers was found to suffer from matrix effects due to built-up of analytes in the SLM, whereas washing of the hollow fibers in acetone was beneficial in terms of recovery, especially for the extraction of the most hydrophobic substances. Several of the organic solvents used in the literature as SLM suffered from poor long-term stability, but silicone oil AR 20 (polyphenyl-methylsiloxane), 2-nitrophenyl octyl ether (NPOE), and dodecyl acetate (DDA) all extracted with unaltered performance even after 60 days of storage at room temperature. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
supported liquid membranes, stability, repeatability, recovery, liquid-phase microextraction, practical considerations
in
Journal of Separation Science
volume
30
issue
9
pages
1364 - 1370
publisher
John Wiley & Sons
external identifiers
  • wos:000247523200021
  • scopus:34250801489
ISSN
1615-9314
DOI
10.1002/jssc.200600486
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
9aa6022d-9084-49e8-871c-db50aa71435c (old id 645586)
date added to LUP
2007-12-07 14:01:32
date last changed
2017-07-23 03:41:40
@article{9aa6022d-9084-49e8-871c-db50aa71435c,
  abstract     = {In this work, three-phase liquid-phase microextraction (LPME) based on a supported liquid membrane (SLM) sustained in the wall of a hollow fiber was investigated with special focus on optimization of the experimental procedures in terms of recovery and repeatability. Recovery data for doxepin, amitriptyline, clomipramine, and mianserin were in the range of 67.8-79.8%. Within-day repeatability data for the four basic drugs were in the range of 4.1-7.7%. No single factor was found to be responsible for these variations, and the variability was caused by several factors related to the LPME extractions as well as to the final HPLC determination. Although the volume of the SLM varied within 0.4-3.1% RSD depending on the preparation procedure, and the volume of the acceptor solution varied within 4.8% RSD, both recoveries and repeatability were found to be relative insensitive to these variations. Thus, the handling of microliters of liquid in LPME was not a very critical factor, and the preparation of the SLM was accomplished in several different ways with comparable performance. Reuse of hollow fibers was found to suffer from matrix effects due to built-up of analytes in the SLM, whereas washing of the hollow fibers in acetone was beneficial in terms of recovery, especially for the extraction of the most hydrophobic substances. Several of the organic solvents used in the literature as SLM suffered from poor long-term stability, but silicone oil AR 20 (polyphenyl-methylsiloxane), 2-nitrophenyl octyl ether (NPOE), and dodecyl acetate (DDA) all extracted with unaltered performance even after 60 days of storage at room temperature.},
  author       = {Bårdstu, Kari Folde and Ho, Tung Si and Rasmussen, Knut Einar and Pedersen-Bjergaard, Stig and Jönsson, Jan Åke},
  issn         = {1615-9314},
  keyword      = {supported liquid membranes,stability,repeatability,recovery,liquid-phase microextraction,practical considerations},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {9},
  pages        = {1364--1370},
  publisher    = {John Wiley & Sons},
  series       = {Journal of Separation Science},
  title        = {Supported liquid membranes in hollow fiber liquid-phase microextraction (LPME) - Practical considerations in the three-phase mode},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200600486},
  volume       = {30},
  year         = {2007},
}