Evolution of dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) has become a very popular environmentally benign sample-preparation technique, because it is fast, inexpensive, easy to operate with a high enrichment factor and consumes low volume of organic solvent. DLLME is a modified solvent extraction method in which acceptor-to-donor phase ratio is greatly reduced compared with other methods. In this review, in order to encourage further development of DLLME, its combination with different analytical techniques such as gas chromatography (GC), high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), inductively coupled plasma-optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES) and electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry (ET AAS) will be discussed. Also, its applications in conjunction with different extraction techniques such as solid-phase extraction (SPE), solidification of floating organic drop (SFO) and supercritical fluid extraction (SFE) are summarized. This review focuses on the extra steps in sample preparation for application of DLLME in different matrixes such as food, biological fluids and solid samples. Further, the recent developments in DLLME are presented. DLLME does have some limitations, which will also be discussed in detail. Finally, an outlook on the future of the technique will be given.     

Recent developments in dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction

During the past 7 years and since the introduction of dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME), the method has gained widespread acceptance as a simple, fast, and miniaturized sample preparation technique. Owing to its simplicity of operation, rapidity, low cost, high recovery, and low consumption of organic solvents and reagents, it has been applied for determination of a vast variety of organic and inorganic compounds in different matrices. This review summarizes the DLLME principles, historical developments, and various modes of the technique, recent trends, and selected applications. The main focus is on recent technological advances and important applications of DLLME. In this review, six important aspects in the development of DLLME are discussed: (1) the type of extraction solvent, (2) the type of disperser solvent, (3) combination of DLLME with other extraction methods, (4) automation of DLLME, (5) derivatization reactions in DLLME, and (6) the application of DLLME for metal analysis. Literature published from 2010 to April 2013 is covered.     

One-step in-syringe ionic liquid-based dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) has been proved to be a powerful tool for the rapid sample treatment of liquid samples providing at the same time high enrichment factors and extraction recoveries. A new, simple and easy to handle one step in-syringe set-up for DLLME is presented and critically discussed in this paper. The novel approach avoids the centrifugation step, typically off-line and time consuming, opening-up a new horizon on DLLME automation. The suitability of the proposal is evaluated by means of the determination of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in urine by liquid chromatography/ultraviolet detection. In the presented approach an ionic liquid is used as extractant. The target drugs can be determined in urine within the concentration range 0.02–10 μg mL⁻¹, allowing their determination at therapeutic and toxic levels. Limits of detection were in the range from 8.3 ng mL⁻¹ (indomethacin) to 32 ng mL⁻¹ (ketoprofen). The repeatability of the proposed method expressed as RSD (n = 5) varied between 2.5% (for ketoprofen) and 8.6% (for indomethacin).     

Determination of triazines in honey by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction high-performance liquid chromatography

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) was developed for extraction and determination of triazines from honey. A room temperature ionic liquid, 1-hexyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate [C₆MIM][PF_6.], was used as extraction solvent and Triton X 114 was used as dispersant. A mixture of 175 μL [C₆MIM][PF₆] and 50 μL 10% Triton X 114 was rapidly injected into the 20 mL honey sample by syringe. After extraction, phase separation was performed by centrifugation and the sedimented phase was analyzed by HPLC. Some experimental parameters, such as type and volume of extraction solvent, concentration of dispersant, pH value of sample solution, salt concentration and extraction time were investigated and optimized. The detection limits for chlortoluron, prometon, propazine, linuron and prebane are 6.92, 5.84, 8.55, 8.59 and 5.31 μg kg⁻¹, respectively. The main advantages of the proposed method are simplicity of operation, low cost, high enrichment factor and extraction solvent volume at microliter level. Honey samples were analyzed by the proposed method and obtained results indicated that the proposed method provides acceptable recoveries and precisions.     

In-situ ionic liquid-based microwave-assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction of triazine herbicides

We report on the determination of the triazine herbicides ametryne, prometryne, terbuthylazine and terbutryn in water samples. The herbicides are extracted by in-situ ionic liquid-based microwave-assisted dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction and then determined by high-performance liquid chromatography. This is a new method for extraction that has the advantages of requiring less volume of ionic liquid (IL) than other methods and at the same time is quite fast. The type and volume of IL, the type and volume of disperser, irradiation temperature, extraction time and salt concentration were optimized. Figures of merit include linear regression coefficients between 0.9992 and 0.9995, acceptable recoveries (88.4–114?%), relative standard deviations of 1.6–6.2?%, and limits of detection between 0.52 and 1.3?μg?L^?1.

Ionic liquid based dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for the extraction of pesticides from bananas

This paper describes a dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) procedure using room temperature ionic liquids (RTILs) coupled to high-performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection capable of quantifying trace amounts of eight pesticides (i.e. thiophanate-methyl, carbofuran, carbaryl, tebuconazole, iprodione, oxyfluorfen, hexythiazox and fenazaquin) in bananas. Fruit samples were first homogenized and extracted (1 g) with acetonitrile and after suitable evaporation and reconstitution of the extract in 10 mL of water, a DLLME procedure using 1-hexyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ([C₆MIM][PF₆]) as extraction solvent was used. Experimental conditions affecting the DLLME procedure (sample pH, sodium chloride percentage, ionic liquid amount and volume of disperser solvent) were optimized by means of an experimental design. In order to determine the presence of a matrix effect, calibration curves for standards and fortified banana extracts (matrix matched calibration) were studied. Mean recovery values of the extraction of the pesticides from banana samples were in the range of 69–97% (except for thiophanate-methyl and carbofuran, which were 53–63%) with a relative standard deviation lower than 8.7% in all cases. Limits of detection achieved (0.320–4.66 μg/kg) were below the harmonized maximum residue limits established by the European Union (EU). The proposed method, was also applied to the analysis of this group of pesticides in nine banana samples taken from the local markets of the Canary Islands (Spain). To the best of our knowledge, this is the first application of RTILs as extraction solvents for DLLME of pesticides from samples different than water.     

Determination of four heterocyclic insecticides by ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction in water samples

A novel microextraction method termed ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (IL-DLLME) combining high-performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection (HPLC-DAD) was developed for the determination of insecticides in water samples. Four heterocyclic insecticides (fipronil, chlorfenapyr, buprofezin, and hexythiazox) were selected as the model compounds for validating this new method. This technique combines extraction and concentration of the analytes into one step, and the ionic liquid was used instead of a volatile organic solvent as the extraction solvent. Several important parameters influencing the IL-DLLME extraction efficiency such as the volume of extraction solvent, the type and volume of disperser solvent, extraction time, centrifugation time, salt effect as well as acid addition were investigated. Under the optimized conditions, good enrichment factors (209–276) and accepted recoveries (79–110%) were obtained for the extraction of the target analytes in water samples. The calibration curves were linear with correlation coefficient ranged from 0.9947 to 0.9973 in the concentration level of 2–100 μg/L, and the relative standard deviations (RSDs, n = 5) were 4.5–10.7%. The limits of detection for the four insecticides were 0.53–1.28 μg/L at a signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) of 3.     

Effervescence assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction with extractant removal by magnetic nanoparticles

In this article, effervescence assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction with extractant removal by magnetic nanoparticles is presented for the first time. The extraction technique makes use of a mixture of 1-octanol and bare Fe₃O₄ magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) in acetic acid. This mixture is injected into the sample, which is previously fortified with carbonate, and as a consequence of the effervescence reaction, CO₂ bubbles are generated making possible the easy dispersion of the extraction solvent. In addition, the MNPs facilitates the recovery of the 1-octanol after the extraction thanks to the interaction between hydroxyl groups present at the surface of the MNPs and the alcohol functional group of the solvent. The extraction mode has been optimized and characterized using the determination of six herbicides in water samples as model analytical problem. The enrichment factors obtained for the analytes were in the range 21–185. These values permit the determination of the target analytes at the low microgram per liter range with good precision (relative standard deviations lower than 11.7%) using gas chromatography (GC) coupled to mass spectrometry (MS) as analytical technique.     

Completely automated in-syringe dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction using solvents lighter than water

This paper describes the development of a new multisyringe flow injection analysis set-up that enables the complete automation of the dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) technique using solvents lighter than water. Its hyphenation with a liquid chromatographic separation is implemented using a single multisyringe pump obtaining a compact, simple, easy to operate, and fast instrument. DLLME is carried out with a throughput of 42 h⁻¹ and DLLME for the extraction of benzo(a)pyrene and its subsequent chromatographic determination can be carried out with an analysis throughput of 7 h⁻¹.     

Determination of priority pollutants in aqueous samples by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction

A dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) method followed by high-performance liquid chromatography–triple quadrupole mass spectrometry has been developed for the simultaneous determination of linear alkylbenzene sulfonates (LAS C₁₀, C₁₁, C₁₂, and C₁₃), nonylphenol (NP), nonylphenol mono- and diethoxylates (NP₁EO and NP₂EO), and di-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP). The applicability of the method has been tested by the determination of the above mentioned organic pollutants in tap water and wastewater. Several parameters affecting DLLME, such as, the type and volume of the extraction and disperser solvents, sample pH, ionic strength and number of extractions, have been evaluated. Methanol (1.5 mL) was selected among the six disperser solvent tested. Dichlorobenzene (50 μL) was selected among the four extraction solvent tested. Enrichment factor achieved was 80. Linear ranges in samples were 0.01–3.42 μg L⁻¹ for LAS C₁₀–₁₃ and NP₂EO, 0.09–5.17 μg L⁻¹ for NP₁EO, 0.17–9.19 μg L⁻¹ for NP and 0.40–17.9 μg L⁻¹ for DEHP. Coefficients of correlation were higher than 0.997. Limits of quantitation in tap water and wastewater were in the ranges 0.009–0.019 μg L⁻¹ for LAS, 0.009–0.091 μg L⁻¹ for NP, NP₁EO and NP₂EO and 0.201–0.224 μg L⁻¹ for DEHP. Extraction recoveries were in the range from 57 to 80%, except for LAS C₁₀ (30–36%). The method was successfully applied to the determination of these pollutants in tap water and effluent wastewater from Seville (South of Spain). The DLLME method developed is fast, easy to perform, requires low solvent volumes and allows the determination of the priority hazardous substances NP and DEHP (Directive 2008/105/EC).     

Pesticide extraction from table grapes and plums using ionic liquid based dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction

Room temperature ionic liquids (RTILs) have been used as extraction solvents in dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) for the determination of eight multi-class pesticides (i.e. thiophanate-methyl, carbofuran, carbaryl, tebuconazole, iprodione, oxyfluorfen, hexythiazox, and fenazaquin) in table grapes and plums. The developed method involves the combination of DLLME and high-performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection. Samples were first homogenized and extracted with acetonitrile. After evaporation and reconstitution of the extract in water containing sodium chloride, a quick DLLME procedure that used the ionic liquid 1-hexyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ([C₆MIM][PF₆]) and methanol was developed. The RTIL dissolved in a very small volume of acetonitrile was directed injected in the chromatographic system. The comparison between the calibration curves obtained from standards and from spiked sample extracts (matrix-matched calibration) showed the existence of a strong matrix effect for most of the analyzed pesticides. A recovery study was also developed with five consecutive extractions of the two types of fruits spiked at three concentration levels. Mean recovery values were in the range of 72–100% for table grapes and 66–105% for plum samples (except for thiophanate-methyl and carbofuran, which were 64–75% and 58–66%, respectively). Limits of detection (LODs) were in the range 0.651–5.44 μg/kg for table grapes and 0.902–6.33 μg/kg for plums, representing LODs below the maximum residue limits (MRLs) established by the European Union in these fruits. The potential of the method was demonstrated by analyzing 12 commercial fruit samples (six of each type).     

Automated on-line dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction based on a sequential injection system

A novel approach for sequential injection-dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (SI-DLLME) has been suggested. The method is based on the aspiration and mixing of a sample and all required aqueous reagents in the holding coil of an SIA system, delivering it into a conical tube and adding in a mixture of extraction solvent, auxiliary solvent and disperser solvent at high flow rate, resulting in the formation of a cloudy state and the extraction of an analyte. The mixture of extraction and auxiliary solvent is immiscible with water and has a density significantly higher than that of water; consequently, the resulting fine droplets in the mixture, which contain the extracted analyte, are self-sedimented in a short time at the bottom of conical tube. Thus, no centrifugation and no use of a microcolumn are required for separation of the extraction phase. Afterwards, the extracted analyte is aspirated and transferred to a micro-volume Z-flow cell, and the absorbance is measured.The performance of the suggested approach is demonstrated by the SI-DLLME of thiocyanate ions in the form of ion associate with dimethylindocarbocyanine reagent, followed by spectrophotometric detection. A mixture of amyl acetate (as extraction solvent), tetrachloromethane (as auxiliary solvent) and acetonitrile (as disperser solvent) was selected for the DLLME procedure. The appropriate experimental conditions for conventional DLLME and automated SI-DLLME were investigated. The analytical performance of both these procedures was compared. The absorbance of the colored extracts at wavelength 555 nm obeys Beer's law in the range of 3.13–28.2 for conventional DLLME and 0.29–5.81 mg L^? 1 of SCN for SI-DLLME, and the limit of detection, calculated from a blank test based on 3 s, is 0.110 for conventional DLLME and 0.017 mg L^? 1 for SI-DLLME.     

Optimization of parameters for the alcoholic-assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction of estrogens in water

Extraction and determination of estrogens in water samples were performed using alcoholic-assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (AA-DLLME) and high-performance liquid chromatography (UV/Vis detection). A Plackett–Burman design and a central composite design were applied to evaluate the AA-DLLME procedure. The effect of six parameters on extraction efficiency was investigated. The factors studied were volume of extraction and dispersive solvents, extraction time, pH, amount of salt and agitation rate. According to Plackett–Burman design results, the effective parameters were volume of extraction solvent and pH. Next, a central composite design was applied to obtain optimal condition. The optimized conditions were obtained at 220 μL 1-octanol as extraction solvent, 700 μL ethanol as dispersive solvent, pH 6 and 200 μL sample volume. Linearity was observed in the range of 1–500 μg L^?1 for E2 and 0.1–100 μg L^?1 for E1. Limits of detection were 0.1 μg L^?1 for E2 and 0.01 μg L^?1 for E1. The enrichment factors and extraction recoveries were 42.2, 46.4 and 80.4, 86.7, respectively. The relative standard deviations for determination of estrogens in water were in the range of 3.9–7.2 % (n = 3). The developed method was successfully applied for the determination of estrogens in environmental water samples.     

Evaluation of lithium separation by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction using benzo-15-crown-5

In this article a dispersive liquid?Cliquid microextraction method was applied for evaluation of lithium separation from aqueous solution. Benzo-15-crown-5 (B15C5) was used as a chelating agent prior to extraction. An appropriate mixture of disperser solvent and extraction solvent were added rapidly into the aqueous sample containing lithium ion; as a result, a cloudy solution was formed which consisted of fine droplets of extraction solvent dispersed entirely into aqueous phase. The mixture was centrifuged and the lithium complex with B15C5 was sedimented at the bottom of the conical sample holder. Then, 2.0?mL of enriched phase containing lithium complex was used for determination of lithium ion by flame atomic absorption spectrometry. The conditions for the microextraction performance were investigated. Under the best optimized conditions, the accepted recovery factors for the lithium obtained, ranged from 37.24 to 99.63?%. Furthermore, high preconcentration factors (7.46?C19.93) were also achieved. The relative standard deviation for three replicate measurements of 0.127?mg?L^?1 of lithium was 2.83?%.     

Ultrasound-assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for the determination of six pyrethroids in river water

A simple ultrasound-assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method combined with liquid chromatography was developed for the preconcentration and determination of six pyrethroids in river water samples. The procedure was based on a ternary solvent system to formatting tiny droplets of extractant in sample solution by dissolving appropriate amounts of water-immiscible extractant (tetrachloromethane) in watermiscible dispersive solvent (acetone). Various parameters that affected the extraction efficiency (such as type and volume of extraction and dispersive solvent, extraction time, ultrasonic time, and centrifuging time) were evaluated. Under the optimum condition, good linearity was obtained in a range of 0.00059–1.52 mg L⁻¹ for all analytes with the correlation coefficient (r²) > 0.999. Intra-assay and inter-assay precision evaluated as the relative standard deviation (RSD) were less than 3.4 and 8.9%. The recoveries of six pyrethroids at three spiked levels were in the range of 86.2–109.3% with RSD of less than 8.7%. The enrichment factors for the six pyrethroids were ranged from 767 to 1033 folds.     

Sequential injection ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for thallium preconcentration and determination with flame atomic absorption spectrometry

A novel, automatic on-line sequential injection dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction (SI-DLLME) method, based on 1-hexyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate ([Hmim][PF(6)]) ionic liquid as an extractant solvent was developed and demonstrated for trace thallium determination by flame atomic absorption spectrometry. The ionic liquid was on-line fully dispersed into the aqueous solution in a continuous flow format while the TlBr(4)(-) complex was easily migrated into the fine droplets of the extractant due to the huge contact area of them with the aqueous phase. Furthermore, the extractant was simply retained onto the surface of polyurethane foam packed into a microcolumn. No specific conditions like low temperature are required for extractant isolation. All analytical parameters of the proposed method were investigated and optimized. For 15 mL of sample solution, an enhancement factor of 290, a detection limit of 0.86 μg L(-1) and a precision (RSD) of 2.7% at 20.0 μg L(-1) Tl(I) concentration level, was obtained. The developed method was evaluated by analyzing certified reference materials while good recoveries from environmental and biological samples proved that present method was competitive in practical applications.     

Determination of carbohydrates in tobacco by pressurized liquid extraction combined with a novel ultrasound-assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method

A novel derivatization-ultrasonic assisted-dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (UA-DLLME) method for the simultaneous determination of 11 main carbohydrates in tobacco has been developed. The combined method involves pressurized liquid extraction (PLE), derivatization, and UA-DLLME, followed by the analysis of the main carbohydrates with a gas chromatography-flame ionization detector (GC-FID). First, the PLE conditions were optimized using a univariate approach. Then, the derivatization methods were properly compared and optimized. The aldononitrile acetate method combined with the O-methoxyoxime-trimethylsilyl method was used for derivatization. Finally, the critical variables affecting the UA-DLLME extraction efficiency were searched using fractional factorial design (FFD) and further optimized using Doehlert design (DD) of the response surface methodology. The optimum conditions were found to be 44 μL for CHCl₃, 2.3 mL for H₂O, 11% w/v for NaCl, 5 min for the extraction time and 5 min for the centrifugation time. Under the optimized experimental conditions, the detection limit of the method (LODs) and linear correlation coefficient were found to be in the range of 0.06–0.90 μg mL⁻¹ and 0.9987–0.9999. The proposed method was successfully employed to analyze three flue-cured tobacco cultivars, among which the main carbohydrate concentrations were found to be very different.     

Lab in a syringe: fully automated dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction with integrated spectrophotometric detection

A new approach for the integration of various analytical steps inside a syringe (Lab in a Syringe) is presented. Fully automated dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction with integrated spectrophotometric detection is carried out in-syringe using a very simple instrumental setup. The lighter-than-water organic droplets released in the extraction step accumulate at the head of the syringe, where two optical fibers are placed on both sides of the syringe, facing each other and enabling the in situ quantification of the extracted compounds. By this, monitoring of the progressively accumulating droplet in the head of the syringe was further possible. In this first report, the developed instrumental setup has been applied to the determination of the dye rhodamine B in water samples and soft drinks. The main parameters influencing the extraction such as the selection of the extractant and disperser solvents, extractant/disperser and organic/water phase ratios, pH of the aqueous phase, extraction flow rates, and extraction time were investigated. Under the selected conditions, rhodamine B was quantified in a working range of 0.023-2 mg L(-1) with a limit of detection of 0.007 mg L(-1). Good repeatability values of up to 3.2% (RSD) were obtained for ten consecutive extractions. The enrichment factor for a 1 mg L(-1) rhodamine B standard was 23, and up to 51 extractions were accomplished in 1 h.     

Mercury determination in urine samples by gold nanostructured screen-printed carbon electrodes after vortex-assisted ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction

A novel approach is presented to determine mercury in urine samples, employing vortex-assisted ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction and microvolume back-extraction to prepare samples, and screen-printed electrodes modified with gold nanoparticles for voltammetric analysis. Mercury was extracted directly from non-digested urine samples in a water-immiscible ionic liquid, being back-extracted into an acidic aqueous solution. Subsequently, it was determined using gold nanoparticle-modified screen-printed electrodes. Under optimized microextraction conditions, standard addition calibration was applied to urine samples containing 5, 10 and 15 μg L⁻¹ of mercury. Standard addition calibration curves using standards between 0 and 20 μg L⁻¹ gave a high level of linearity with correlation coefficients ranging from 0.990 to 0.999 (N = 5). The limit of detection was empirical and statistically evaluated, obtaining values that ranged from 0.5 to 1.5 μg L⁻¹, and from 1.1 to 1.3 μg L⁻¹, respectively, which are significantly lower than the threshold level established by the World Health Organization for normal mercury content in urine (i.e., 10–20 μg L⁻¹). A certified reference material (REC-8848/Level II) was analyzed to assess method accuracy finding 87% and 3 μg L⁻¹ as the recovery (trueness) and standard deviation values, respectively. Finally, the method was used to analyze spiked urine samples, obtaining good agreement between spiked and found concentrations (recovery ranged from 97 to 100%).     

Trace determination of EDTA from water samples using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with HPLC-DAD

Dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) in conjunction with high-performance liquid chromatography-diode array detection (HPLC-DAD) has been applied to the extraction and determination of EDTA in sediments and water samples. The effect of extraction, nature and volume of disperser solvent, pH value of sample solution, extraction time and extraction temperature were investigated. Under the optimal conditions the analytical range of EDTA was from 3.0 to 50.0 μg L^?1 with a correlation coefficient of 0.9982 and a detection limit of 1.7 μg L^?1. The relative standard deviation (RSD) was less than 5.4% (n?=?5), and the recovery values were in the range of 89–95%. The simplicity, high enrichment, high recovery and good repeatability are the main advantages of the method presented. The DLLME-HPLC-DAD method was successfully applied to the analysis of EDTA in aqueous samples.