Selective determination of acidic pharmaceuticals in wastewater using molecularly imprinted solid-phase extraction

Zorita, Saioa; Boyd, Brian; Jönsson, Stig; Yilmaz, Ecevit; Svensson, Carin; Mathiasson, Lennart; Bergström, Staffan

doi:10.1016/j.aca.2008.07.051

Cited by 66 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(26 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs) are synthetic sorbents that involve a mechanism of molecular recognition and represent a valid alternative when a higher degree of selectivity is needed (Pichon, 2007). In a recent article, Zorita and co-workers report the determination of acidic pharmaceuticals, such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, NSAIDs, (ibuprofen, naproxen, and diclofenac sodium salt), and clofibric acid (metabolite of clofibrate), at low ng/L in wastewater with ESI-LC-MSMS in the negative multiple-reaction monitoring mode (MRM) (Zorita et al, 2008). Sample preparation was carried out from sewage water with molecularly imprinted solid-phase extraction (MISPE).…”

Section: An Overview Of Matrix Effects In Lc-msmentioning

confidence: 99%

An overview of matrix effects in liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry

Trufelli

Palma

Famiglini

2010

Mass Spectrometry Reviews

641

407

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Matrix-dependent signal suppression or enhancement represents a major drawback in quantitative analysis with liquid chromatography coupled to atmospheric pressure ionization mass spectrometry (LC-API-MS). Because matrix effects (ME) might exert a detrimental impact on important method parameters (limit of detection, limit of quantification, linearity, accuracy, and precision), they have to be tested and evaluated during validation procedure. This review gives a detailed description on when these phenomena might be expected, and how they can be evaluated. The major sources of ME are discussed and illustrated with examples from bioanalytical, pharmaceutical, environmental, and food analysis. Because there is no universal solution for ME, the main strategies to overcome these phenomena are described in detail. Special emphasis is devoted to the sample-preparation procedures as well as to the recent improvements on chromatographic and mass spectrometric conditions. An overview of the main calibration techniques to compensate for ME is also presented. All these solutions can be used alone or in combination to retrieve the performance of the LC-MS for a particular matrix-analyte combination.

show abstract

Section: An Overview Of Matrix Effects In Lc-msmentioning

confidence: 99%

An overview of matrix effects in liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry

Trufelli

Palma

Famiglini

2010

Mass Spectrometry Reviews

641

407

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This apparent inferiority of the NIP may be due, however, to using it in a method optimized for the MIP, not for the NIP. Indeed, NIPs themselves are interesting for some applications [67,68] or have comparable performance to MIPs [69][70][71][72]. Usually they have their own selectivity [73][74][75][76][77] and during the imprinting process, this selectivity and/or their adsorption ability is only slightly improved (if at all).…”

Section: Replacement Of the Mip By Non-imprinted Polymersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Isotherm charts for material selection and method development with molecularly imprinted polymers and other sorbents

Dorkó

Tamás

Horvai

2017

Talanta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A simple and efficient method is presented for assessing molecularly imprinted polymers (MIP) and other sorbents from the point of view of practical applications. The adsorption isotherms of the compounds, which need to be separated or detected in an application, are constructed from a small number of measured points on a log-log chart and then are compared graphically. Despite its simplicity and robustness this method reveals the information needed for optimal selection between MIPs and alternative sorbents. The design of separation or detection methods with MIPs is also supported by the proposed graphical isotherm comparison. Many experimental isotherms are presented supporting the proposed method.

show abstract

“…The results showed that the recovery in methanol is optimum, but the recovery of melamine in H 2 O was also over 97%. Then the effect of pH value of H 2 O was compared, as an optimum pH is crucial for trapping [32]. When 0.5 and 1% trichloroacetic acid solutions were used, losses of melamine were over 50%.…”

Section: Methods Optimizationmentioning

confidence: 99%