4.7 Article

Facile synthesis of magnetic carbon nanotubes derived from ZIF-67 and application to magnetic solid-phase extraction of profens from human serum

期刊

TALANTA
卷 207, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2019.120284

关键词

High performance liquid chromatography; Magnetic solid-phase extraction; Metal-organic frameworks; Carbon nanotubes; Profens

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21765002, 21565008]
  2. Guangxi Natural Science Foundation of China [2017GXNSFDA198044]
  3. BAGUI Scholar Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Magnetic carbon nanotubes (CNTs) with encapsulated Co nanoparticles (Co@CNTs), was synthesized by exploiting the one-step pyrolysis strategy using ZIF-67 as template. The as-synthesized Co@CNTs is provided with the nanopores, a large specific surface area, and strong magnetic response. The obtained Co@CNTs was used as magnetic solid-phase extraction adsorbents to extract two profens including flurbiprofen and ketoprofen. The parameters of extraction efficiency, involving extraction time, sample solution volume, ionic strength, pH and the conditions of desorption efficiency, were optimized in detail. After determined by high-performance liquid chromatography-ultraviolet (HPLC-UV), the results evinced that Co@CNTs showed a high extraction efficiency with high enrichment factors of 832 and 672. The good linear range of both flurbiprofen and ketoprofen were all 5.0-1000 ng L-1, with the limit of detection were 0.60 ng L-1 and 0.70 ng L-1, respectively. Furthermore, a valid method for the extraction of flurbiprofen and ketoprofen from human serum was established. The spiking recoveries of two profens were between 86.74% and 97.22%, and the relative standard deviation was less than 6.55%. Co@CNTs can be repeatedly used at least 10 times, indicating its excellent regeneration and reusability. The results demonstrated that the Co@CNTs materials exhibits high enrichment ability and extraction efficiency, playing great promise in MSPE.

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。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据