期刊
TRAC-TRENDS IN ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 113, 期 -, 页码 321-331出版社
ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.trac.2018.11.013
关键词
SPME; SBSE; ITEX-DHS; SPDE; PAL SPME Arrow; GC-MS; Water analysis; Pollutants
资金
- Evonik Industries AG, Essen
- REMEDIATE (Improved decision-making in contaminated land site investigation and risk assessment) MarieCurie Innovation Training Network
- European Union [643087]
- Marie Curie Actions (MSCA) [643087] Funding Source: Marie Curie Actions (MSCA)
Microextraction techniques have been proven to provide similar or better results in terms of sensitivity and reproducibility in comparison to liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) and solid-phase extraction (SPE). Furthermore, the high time efficiency and decreased workload leads to a higher sample throughput. In this review the state of the art of some of these techniques, namely solid-phase microextraction (SPME), stir-bar sorptive extraction (SBSE), solid-phase dynamic extraction (SPDE), in-tube extraction-dynamic headspace (ITEX-DHS) and PAL SPME Arrow is shown. Furthermore, their benefits and drawbacks are discussed, together with their applicability to the analysis of water samples. To that end, the latest publications of microextraction techniques for a selection of regulated compound classes (chlorophenols (CPs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), pesticides, short-chained chlorinated paraffins (SCCPs) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs)) are compared. Finally, a guideline for choosing the best microextraction technique for different analytical needs is described. (C) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据