Cargando…

Liquid-phase microextraction of aromatic amines: hollow fiber–liquid-phase microextraction and parallel artificial liquid membrane extraction comparison

Aromatic amines (AA) are carcinogenic compounds that can enter the human body through many sources, one of the most important being tobacco smoke. They are excreted with the urine, from which they can be extracted and measured. To that end, hollow fiber-liquid-phase microextraction (HF-LPME) and par...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lorenzo-Parodi, Nerea, Kaziur-Cegla, Wiebke, Gjelstad, Astrid, Schmidt, Torsten C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9992073/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36820909
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00216-023-04579-w
_version_ 1784902267100463104
author Lorenzo-Parodi, Nerea
Kaziur-Cegla, Wiebke
Gjelstad, Astrid
Schmidt, Torsten C.
author_facet Lorenzo-Parodi, Nerea
Kaziur-Cegla, Wiebke
Gjelstad, Astrid
Schmidt, Torsten C.
author_sort Lorenzo-Parodi, Nerea
collection PubMed
description Aromatic amines (AA) are carcinogenic compounds that can enter the human body through many sources, one of the most important being tobacco smoke. They are excreted with the urine, from which they can be extracted and measured. To that end, hollow fiber-liquid-phase microextraction (HF-LPME) and parallel artificial liquid membrane extraction (PALME) were optimized for the analysis of representative aromatic amines, as alternatives to liquid–liquid extraction (LLE). Relevant extraction parameters, namely organic solvent, extraction time, agitation speed, and acceptor solution pH, were studied, and the two optimized techniques—HF-LPME: dihexyl ether, 45 min, 250 rpm, and pH 1; PALME: undecane, 20 min, 250 rpm and pH 1—were compared. Comparison of the optimized methods showed that significantly higher recoveries could be obtained with PALME than with HF-LPME. Therefore, PALME was further validated. The results were successful for nine different AA, with regression coefficients (R(2)) of at least 0.991, limits of detection (LOD) of 45–75 ng/L, and repeatability and peak area relative standard deviations (RSD) below 20%. Furthermore, two urine samples from smokers were measured as proof of concept, and 2-methylaniline was successfully quantified in one of them. These results show that PALME is a great green alternative to LLE. Not only does it use much smaller volumes of toxic organic solvents, and sample—enabling the study of samples with limited available volumes—but it is also less time consuming and labor intensive, and it can be automated. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00216-023-04579-w.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9992073
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99920732023-03-09 Liquid-phase microextraction of aromatic amines: hollow fiber–liquid-phase microextraction and parallel artificial liquid membrane extraction comparison Lorenzo-Parodi, Nerea Kaziur-Cegla, Wiebke Gjelstad, Astrid Schmidt, Torsten C. Anal Bioanal Chem Research Paper Aromatic amines (AA) are carcinogenic compounds that can enter the human body through many sources, one of the most important being tobacco smoke. They are excreted with the urine, from which they can be extracted and measured. To that end, hollow fiber-liquid-phase microextraction (HF-LPME) and parallel artificial liquid membrane extraction (PALME) were optimized for the analysis of representative aromatic amines, as alternatives to liquid–liquid extraction (LLE). Relevant extraction parameters, namely organic solvent, extraction time, agitation speed, and acceptor solution pH, were studied, and the two optimized techniques—HF-LPME: dihexyl ether, 45 min, 250 rpm, and pH 1; PALME: undecane, 20 min, 250 rpm and pH 1—were compared. Comparison of the optimized methods showed that significantly higher recoveries could be obtained with PALME than with HF-LPME. Therefore, PALME was further validated. The results were successful for nine different AA, with regression coefficients (R(2)) of at least 0.991, limits of detection (LOD) of 45–75 ng/L, and repeatability and peak area relative standard deviations (RSD) below 20%. Furthermore, two urine samples from smokers were measured as proof of concept, and 2-methylaniline was successfully quantified in one of them. These results show that PALME is a great green alternative to LLE. Not only does it use much smaller volumes of toxic organic solvents, and sample—enabling the study of samples with limited available volumes—but it is also less time consuming and labor intensive, and it can be automated. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00216-023-04579-w. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-02-23 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC9992073/ /pubmed/36820909 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00216-023-04579-w Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Research Paper
Lorenzo-Parodi, Nerea
Kaziur-Cegla, Wiebke
Gjelstad, Astrid
Schmidt, Torsten C.
Liquid-phase microextraction of aromatic amines: hollow fiber–liquid-phase microextraction and parallel artificial liquid membrane extraction comparison
title Liquid-phase microextraction of aromatic amines: hollow fiber–liquid-phase microextraction and parallel artificial liquid membrane extraction comparison
title_full Liquid-phase microextraction of aromatic amines: hollow fiber–liquid-phase microextraction and parallel artificial liquid membrane extraction comparison
title_fullStr Liquid-phase microextraction of aromatic amines: hollow fiber–liquid-phase microextraction and parallel artificial liquid membrane extraction comparison
title_full_unstemmed Liquid-phase microextraction of aromatic amines: hollow fiber–liquid-phase microextraction and parallel artificial liquid membrane extraction comparison
title_short Liquid-phase microextraction of aromatic amines: hollow fiber–liquid-phase microextraction and parallel artificial liquid membrane extraction comparison
title_sort liquid-phase microextraction of aromatic amines: hollow fiber–liquid-phase microextraction and parallel artificial liquid membrane extraction comparison
topic Research Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9992073/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36820909
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00216-023-04579-w
work_keys_str_mv AT lorenzoparodinerea liquidphasemicroextractionofaromaticamineshollowfiberliquidphasemicroextractionandparallelartificialliquidmembraneextractioncomparison
AT kaziurceglawiebke liquidphasemicroextractionofaromaticamineshollowfiberliquidphasemicroextractionandparallelartificialliquidmembraneextractioncomparison
AT gjelstadastrid liquidphasemicroextractionofaromaticamineshollowfiberliquidphasemicroextractionandparallelartificialliquidmembraneextractioncomparison
AT schmidttorstenc liquidphasemicroextractionofaromaticamineshollowfiberliquidphasemicroextractionandparallelartificialliquidmembraneextractioncomparison