4.7 Article

Novel hydrophobic deep eutectic solvents for ultrasound-assisted dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction of trace non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in water and milk samples

期刊

MICROCHEMICAL JOURNAL
卷 170, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.microc.2021.106686

关键词

Hydrophobic deep eutectic solvent; Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; Dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction; High-performance liquid chromatography

资金

  1. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [DUT18RC (4) 058]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, novel and natural hydrophobic deep eutectic solvents (HDESs) were prepared and used for the analysis of NSAIDs through the UA-DLLME method combined with HPLC. Multiple extraction parameters were optimized, resulting in good sensitivity and recoveries. The method was successfully applied to real samples.
In the present study, several novel and natural hydrophobic deep eutectic solvents (HDESs) were prepared, and one of the HDESs composed of guanidinium chloride and thymol was advantageously used to develop an ultrasound-assisted dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (UA-DLLME) method combined with high-performance liquid chromatography for the determination of four non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Several important parameters influencing extraction efficiency were investigated and optimized, including the type and volume of HDES, ultrasound time, solution pH and the amount of salt addition. Under optimal experimental conditions, the method showed good linearity with the determination coefficients (R-2) of 0.994-0.999 in the linear range of 5-2000 mu g/L, low limits of detection of 0.5-1 mu g/L and acceptable recoveries in the range of 79.42%-107.52%. The proposed method was successfully applied for the pretreatment of trace NSAIDs in real water and milk samples, and the results demonstrated the potential of the synthesized HDES for the extraction and determination of contaminants in aqueous samples.

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