Coupling of homogeneous liquid–liquid extraction and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for the extraction and preconcentration of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from aqueous samples followed by GC with flame ionization detection

In the present study, a simple and rapid method for the extraction and preconcentration of some polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in water samples has been developed. In this method, two sample preparation methods were combined to obtain high extraction recoveries and enrichment factors for sensitive analysis of the selected analytes. In the first stage of the method, a homogeneous solution containing an aqueous solution and cyclohexyl amine is broken by the addition of a salt. After centrifugation, the upper collected phase containing the extracted analytes is subjected to the following dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method. Rapid injection of the mixture of cyclohexyl amine resulted from the first stage and 1,1,2‐trichloroethane (as an extraction solvent) into an acetic acid solution is led to form a cloudy solution. After centrifuging, the fine droplets of the extraction solvent are settled down in the bottom of the test tube, and an aliquot of it is analyzed by gas chromatography. Under the optimum extraction conditions, enrichment factors and limits of detection for the studied analytes were obtained in the ranges of 616–752 and 0.08–0.20 μg/L, respectively. The simplicity, high extraction efficiency, short sample preparation time, low cost, and safety demonstrated the efficiency of this method relative to other approaches.     

Development of a simple and valid method for the trace determination of phthalate esters in human plasma using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled with gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

A new method was developed for the trace determination of phthalic acid esters in plasma using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction and gas chromatography with mass spectrometry analysis. Plasma proteins were efficiently precipitated by trichloroacetic acid and then a mixture of chlorobenzene (as extraction solvent) and acetonitrile (as dispersive solvent) rapidly injected to clear supernatant using a syringe. After centrifuging, chlorobenzene sedimented at the bottom of the test tube. 1 μL of this sedimented phase was injected into the gas chromatograph for phthalic acid esters analysis. Different factors affecting the extraction performance, such as the type of extraction and dispersive solvent, their volume, extraction time, and the effects of salt addition were investigated and optimized. Under the optimum conditions, the enrichment factors and extraction recoveries were satisfactory and ranged between 820–1020 and 91–97%, respectively. The linear range was wide (50–1000 ng/mL) and limit of detection was very low (1.5–2.5 ng/mL for all analytes). The relative standard deviations for analysis of 1 μg/mL of the analytes were between 3.2–6.1%. Salt addition showed no significant effect on extraction recovery. Finally, the proposed method was successfully utilized for the extraction and determination of the phthalic acid esters in human plasma samples and satisfactory results were obtained.     

Vortex‐assisted extraction combined with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for the determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in sediment by high performance liquid chromatography

A simple, rapid, and efficient method, vortex‐assisted extraction followed by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME) has been developed for the extraction of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in sediment samples prior to analysis by high performance liquid chromatography fluorescence detection. Acetonitrile was used as collecting solvent for the extraction of PAHs from sediment by vortex‐assisted extraction. In DLLME, PAHs were rapidly transferred from acetonitrile to dichloromethane. Under the optimum conditions, the method yields a linear calibration curve in the concentration range from 10 to 2100 ng g^?1 for fluorene, anthracene, chrysene, benzo[k]fluoranthene, and benzo[a]pyrene, and 20 to 2100 ng g^?1 for other target analytes. Coefficients of determinations ranged from 0.9986 to 0.9994. The limits of detection, based on signal‐to‐noise ratio of three, ranged from 2.3 to 6.8 ng g^?1. Reproducibility and recoveries was assessed by extracting a series of six independent sediment samples, which were spiked with different concentration levels. Finally, the proposed method was successfully applied in analyses of real nature sediment samples. The proposed method extended and improved the application of DLLME to solid samples, which greatly shorten the extraction time and simplified the extraction process.     

Determination of three antidepressants in urine using simultaneous derivatization and temperature‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction followed by gas chromatography–flame ionization detection

This paper presents a fast and simple method for the extraction, preconcentration and determination of fluvoxamine, nortriptyline and maprotiline in urine using simultaneous derivatization and temperature‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (TA‐DLLME) followed by gas chromatography–flame ionization detection (GC‐FID). An appropriate mixture of dimethylformamide (disperser solvent), 1,1,2,2‐tetrachloroethane (extraction solvent) and acetic anhydride (derivatization agent) was rapidly injected into the heated sample. Then the solution was cooled to room temperature and cloudy solution formed was centrifuged. Finally a portion of the sedimented phase was injected into the GC‐FID. The effect of several factors affecting the performance of the method, including the selection of suitable extraction and disperser solvents and their volumes, volume of derivatization agent, temperature, salt addition, pH and centrifugation time and speed were investigated and optimized. Figures of merit of the proposed method, such as linearity (r² > 0.993), enrichment factors (820–1070), limits of detection (2–4 ng mL^?1) and quantification (8–12 ng mL^?1), and relative standard deviations (3–6%) for both intraday and interday precisions (concentration = 50 ng mL^?1) were satisfactory for determination of the selected antidepressants. Finally the method was successfully applied to determine the target pharmaceuticals in urine. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Rapid analysis of ultraviolet filters using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction coupled to headspace gas chromatography and mass spectrometry

An ionic‐liquid‐based in situ dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method coupled to headspace gas chromatography and mass spectrometry was developed for the rapid analysis of ultraviolet filters. The chemical structures of five ionic liquids were specifically designed to incorporate various functional groups for the favorable extraction of the target analytes. Extraction parameters including ionic liquid mass, molar ratio of ionic liquid to metathesis reagent, vortex time, ionic strength, pH, and total sample volume were studied and optimized. The effect of the headspace temperature and volume during the headspace sampling step was also evaluated to increase the sensitivity of the method. The optimized procedure is fast as it only required ∼7–10 min per extraction and allowed for multiple extractions to be performed simultaneously. In addition, the method exhibited high precision, good linearity, and low limits of detection for six ultraviolet filters in aqueous samples. The developed method was applied to both pool and lake water samples attaining acceptable relative recovery values.     

Dispersion‐solidification liquid–liquid microextraction for volatile aromatic hydrocarbons determination: Comparison with liquid phase microextraction based on the solidification of a floating drop

Two microextraction techniques – liquid phase microextraction based on solidification of a floating organic drop (LPME‐SFO) and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with a solidification of a floating organic drop (DLLME‐SFO) – are explored for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and o‐xylene sampling and preconcentration. The investigation covers the effects of extraction solvent type, extraction and disperser solvents' volume, and the extraction time. For both techniques 1‐undecanol containing n‐heptane as internal standard was used as an extracting solvent. For DLLME‐SFO acetone was used as a disperser solvent. The calibration curves for both techniques and for all the analytes were linear up to 10 μg/mL, correlation coefficients were in the range 0.997–0.998, enrichment factors were from 87 for benzene to 290 for o‐xylene, detection limits were from 0.31 and 0.35 μg/L for benzene to 0.15 and 0.10 μg/L for o‐xylene for LPME‐SFO and DLLME‐SFO, respectively. Repeatabilities of the results were acceptable with RSDs up to 12%. Being comparable with LPME‐SFO in the analytical characteristics, DLLME‐SFO is superior to LPME‐SFO in the extraction time. A possibility to apply the proposed techniques for volatile aromatic hydrocarbons determination in tap water and snow was demonstrated.     

Development of new extraction method based on liquid–liquid–liquid extraction followed by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for extraction of three tricyclic antidepressants in plasma samples

In the present study, a new extraction method based on a three–phase system, liquid–liquid–liquid extraction, followed by dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction has been developed and validated for the extraction and preconcentration of three commonly prescribed tricyclic antidepressant drugs – amitriptyline, imipramine, and clomipramine – in human plasma prior to their analysis by gas chromatography–flame ionization detection. The three phases were an aqueous phase (plasma), acetonitrile and n–hexane. The extraction mechanism was based on the different affinities of components of the biological sample (lipids, fatty acids, pharmaceuticals, inorganic ions, etc.) toward each of the phases. This provided high selectivity toward the analytes since most interferences were transferred into n–hexane. In this procedure, a homogeneous solution of the aqueous phase (plasma) and acetonitrile (water–soluble extraction solvent) was broken by adding sodium sulfate (as a phase separating agent) and the analytes were extracted into the fine droplets of the formed acetonitrile. Next, acetonitrile phase was mixed with 1,2–dibromoethane (as a preconcentration solvent at microliter level) and then the microextraction procedure mentioned above was performed for further enrichment of the analytes. Under the optimum extraction conditions, limits of detection and lower limits of quantification for the analytes were obtained in the ranges of 0.001–0.003 and 0.003–0.010 μg mL⁻¹, respectively. The obtained extraction recoveries were in the range of 79–98%. Intra– and inter–day precisions were < 7.5%. The validated method was successfully applied for determination of the selected drugs in human plasma samples obtained from the patients who received them.     

Development of organic solvents‐free mode of solidification of floating organic droplet–based dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for the extraction of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from honey samples before their determination by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

In this study, a green mode of solidification of floating organic droplet – based dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction has been developed for the extraction of 16 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from honey samples before their determination by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. In this method, an appropriate volume of menthol:decanoic acid deep eutectic solvent (as an extraction solvent) is added on a sugar cube (as a disperser agent). In the following, the cube is released into the diluted honey sample placed in a tube. After manual shaking a cloudy state is obtained as a result of dispersing the extraction solvent droplets throughout the sample solution and the analytes are extracted into them. After placing the tube in an ice bath, the droplet of the extractant is solidified on the top of the solution. This drop is taken and after dissolving in acetonitrile, an aliquot of the solution is injected into the separation system. Under optimum conditions, the suggested approach had high extraction recoveries (76–93%) and enrichment factors (380–465), low limits of detection (14–52 ng/kg) and quantification (47–173 ng/kg), and satisfactory repeatability (relative standard deviation ≤ 9%).     

Determination of aromatic amines from textiles using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction

A dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction procedure coupled with GC‐MS is described for preconcentration and determination of banned aromatic amines from textile samples. Experimental conditions affecting the microextraction procedure were optimized. A mixture of 30 μL chlorobenzene (extraction solvent) and 800 μL ACN (disperser solvent), 5 min extraction time, and 5 mL aqueous sample volume were chosen for the best extraction efficiency by the proposed procedure. Satisfactory linearity (with correlation coefficients >0.9962) and repeatability (<9.78%) were obtained for all 20 aromatic amines; detection limits attained were much lower than the standardized liquid–liquid method. The proposed method has advantages of being quicker and easier to operate, and lower consumption of organic solvent.     

Application of dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction and gas chromatography with mass spectrometry for the determination of oxygenated volatile organic compounds in effluents from the production of petroleum bitumen

We present a new procedure for the determination of oxygenated volatile organic compounds in samples of postoxidative effluents from the production of petroleum bitumens using dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction and gas chromatography with mass spectrometry. The eight extraction parameters were optimized for 43 oxygenated volatile organic compounds. The detection limits obtained ranged from 0.07 to 0.82 μg/mL for most of the analytes, the precision was good (relative standard deviation below 2.91% at the 5 μg/mL level and 4.75% at the limit of quantification), the recoveries for the majority of compounds varied from 70.6 to 118.9%, and the linear range was wide, which demonstrates the usefulness of the procedure. The developed procedure was used for the determination of oxygenated volatile organic compounds in samples of raw postoxidative effluents and in effluents after chemical treatment. In total, 23 compounds at concentration levels from 0.37 to 32.95 μg/mL were identified in real samples. The same samples were also analyzed in the SCAN mode, which resulted in four more phenol derivatives being identified and tentatively determined. The studies demonstrated the need for monitoring volatile organic compounds content in effluents following various treatments due to the formation of secondary oxygenated volatile organic compounds.     

基于轻质萃取剂的溶剂去乳化分散液-液微萃取-气相色谱法测定水样中多环芳烃

以密度小于水的轻质溶剂为萃取剂,建立了无需离心步骤的溶剂去乳化分散液-液微萃取-气相色谱(SD-DLLME-GC)测定水样中多环芳烃的新方法。传统分散液-液微萃取技术一般采用密度大于水的有机溶剂为萃取剂,并需要通过离心步骤促进分相。而本方法以密度比水小的轻质溶剂甲苯为萃取剂,将其与丙酮(分散剂)混合并快速注入水样,获得雾化体系;然后注入乙腈作为去乳化剂,破坏该雾化体系,无需离心,溶液立即澄清、分相;取上层有机相(甲苯)进行GC分析。考察了萃取剂、分散剂、去乳化剂的种类及其体积等因素对萃取率的影响。以40 μL甲苯为萃取剂,500 μL丙酮为分散剂,800 μL乙腈为去乳化剂,方法在20～500 μg/L范围内呈现出良好的线性(r2=0.9942～0.9999),多环芳烃的检出限(S/N=3)为0.52～5.11 μg/L。用所建立的方法平行测定5份质量浓度为40 μg/L的多环芳烃标准水样,其含量的相对标准偏差为2.2%～13.6%。本法已成功用于实际水样中多环芳烃的分析,并测得其加标回收率为80.2%～115.1%。     

The determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in human urine by high‐resolution gas chromatography–mass spectrometry

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), organic compounds formed by at least two condensed aromatic rings, are ubiquitous environmental pollutants that are produced by incomplete combustion of organic materials. PAHs have been classified as carcinogenIC to humans by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, because they can bind to DNA, causing mutations. Therefore, the levels of PAHs in human urine can be used as an indicator for potential carcinogenesis and cell mutation. An analytical method was developed for the accurate measurement of PAHs in urine using high‐resolution gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. Urine samples were extracted by an Oasis HLB extraction cartridge after enzymatic hydrolysis with a β‐glucuronidase/arylsulfatase cocktail. The 18 PAHs were separated using an Agilent DB‐5 MS capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm, 0.25 μm) and monitored by time‐of‐flight mass spectrometry. Under the optimized method, the linearity of calibration curves was >0.994. The limits of detection at a signal‐to‐noise ratio of 3 were 10–100 ng/L. The coefficients of variation were in the range of 0.4–9.0%. The present method was highly accurate for simultaneous determination of 18 PAHs in human urine and could be applied to monitoring and biomedical investigations to check exposure of PAHs.     

Application of liquid–liquid microextraction for the effective separation and simultaneous determination of 11 pharmaceuticals in wastewater samples using high‐performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry

A dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method for the simultaneous determination of 11 pharmaceuticals has been developed. The method is based on a microextraction procedure applied to wastewater samples from different regions of Hungary followed by high‐performance liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry. The effect of the nature of the extractant, dispersive solvent, different additives, and extraction time were examined on the extraction efficiently of the dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method. Under optimal conditions, the linearity for determining the pharmaceuticals was in the range of 1–500 ng/mL, with the correlation coefficients ranging from 0.9922 to 0.9995. The limits of detection and limits of quantification were in the range of 0.31–6.65 and 0.93–22.18 ng/mL, respectively.     

Comparison of air‐agitated liquid–liquid microextraction and ultrasound‐assisted emulsification microextraction for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons determination in hookah water

In this work, two disperser‐free microextraction methods, namely, air‐agitated liquid–liquid microextraction and ultrasound‐assisted emulsification microextraction are compared for the determination of a number of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in aqueous samples, followed by gas chromatography with flame ionization detection. The effects of various experimental parameters upon the extraction efficiencies of both methods are investigated. Under the optimal conditions, the enrichment factors and limits of detection were found to be in the ranges of 327–773 and 0.015–0.05 ng/mL for air‐agitated liquid–liquid microextraction and 406–670 and 0.015–0.05 ng/mL for ultrasound‐assisted emulsification microextraction, respectively. The linear dynamic ranges and extraction recoveries were obtained to be in the range of 0.05–120 ng/mL (R² ≥ 0.995) and 33–77% for air‐agitated liquid–liquid microextraction and 0.05–110 ng/mL (R² ≥ 0.994) and 41–67% for ultrasound‐assisted emulsification microextraction, respectively. To investigate this common view among some people that smoking hookah is healthy due to the passage of smoke through the hookah water, samples of both the hookah water and hookah smoke were analyzed.     

Application of response surface methodology to vortex‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid extraction for the determination of nicotine and cotinine in urine by gas chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry

A method of vortex‐assisted dispersive liquid–liquid extraction coupled with gas chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry for the determination of nicotine and cotinine in urine was developed. Response surface methodology was applied to obtain the optimum extraction conditions. In this method, Plackett–Burman design was utilized to evaluate the impact of five selected factors on pretreatment procedure. Then, three main factors were optimized using a Box–Behnken design. The optimized method showed good linearities at 1–2000 μg/L with correlation coefficients of 0.9998 for nicotine and 0.9986 for cotinine. Recovery was 91.4–106 and 91.7–108% for nicotine and cotinine, respectively. The intraday relative standard derivations of determination were 1.47–4.06% for nicotine and 0.41–3.16% for cotinine, and interday relative standard derivations were 3.03–6.70% for nicotine and 1.64–6.38% for cotinine. The method detection limits for nicotine and cotinine were 0.33 and 0.34 μg/L, respectively. A total of 87 urine samples from smokers and nonsmokers were tested with the proposed method. Urinary nicotine and cotinine were 23.0–6.67 × 10³ and 18.4–4.17 × 10³ μg/(g·cr) for smokers and 1.31–286 and 1.39–131 μg/(g·cr) for nonsmokers, respectively. The method is sensitive, suitable and reliable for the determination of nicotine and cotinine in urine and meets the requirements for evaluating short‐term tobacco exposure.     

Accelerated solvent extraction combined with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction before gas chromatography with mass spectrometry for the sensitive determination of phenols in soil samples

A method combining accelerated solvent extraction with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction was developed for the first time as a sample pretreatment for the rapid analysis of phenols (including phenol, m‐cresol, 2,4‐dichlorophenol, and 2,4,6‐trichlorophenol) in soil samples. In the accelerated solvent extraction procedure, water was used as an extraction solvent, and phenols were extracted from soil samples into water. The dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction technique was then performed on the obtained aqueous solution. Important accelerated solvent extraction and dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction parameters were investigated and optimized. Under optimized conditions, the new method provided wide linearity (6.1–3080 ng/g), low limits of detection (0.06–1.83 ng/g), and excellent reproducibility (<10%) for phenols. Four real soil samples were analyzed by the proposed method to assess its applicability. Experimental results showed that the soil samples were free of our target compounds, and average recoveries were in the range of 87.9–110%. These findings indicate that accelerated solvent extraction with dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction as a sample pretreatment procedure coupled with gas chromatography and mass spectrometry is an excellent method for the rapid analysis of trace levels of phenols in environmental soil samples.     

Development of a dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method using a lighter‐than‐water ionic liquid for the analysis of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in water

A dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method using a lighter‐than‐water phosphonium‐based ionic liquid for the extraction of 16 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from water samples has been developed. The extracted compounds were analyzed by liquid chromatography coupled to fluorescence/diode array detectors. The effects of several experimental parameters on the extraction efficiency, such as type and volume of ionic liquid and disperser solvent, type and concentration of salt in the aqueous phase and extraction time, were investigated and optimized. Three phosphonium‐based ionic liquids were assayed, obtaining larger extraction efficiencies when trihexyl‐(tetradecyl)phosphonium bromide was used. The optimized methodology requires a few microliters of a lighter‐than‐water phosphonium‐based ionic liquid, which allows an easy separation of the extraction solvent phase. The obtained limits of detection were between 0.02 and 0.56 μg/L, enrichment factors between 109 and 228, recoveries between 60 and 108%, trueness between 0.4 and 9.9% and reproducibility values between 3 and 12% were obtained. These figures of merit combined with the simplicity, rapidity and low cost of the analytical methodology indicate that this is a viable and convenient alternative to the methods reported in the literature. The developed method was used to analyze polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in river water samples.     

Determination of N‐nitrosamines by automated dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction integrated with gas chromatography and mass spectrometry

An automated dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction integrated with gas chromatography and mass spectrometric procedure was developed for the determination of three N‐nitrosamines (N‐nitroso‐di‐n‐propylamine, N‐nitrosopiperidine, and N‐nitroso di‐n‐butylamine) in water samples. Response surface methodology was employed to optimize relevant extraction parameters including extraction time, dispersive solvent volume, water sample pH, sodium chloride concentration, and agitation (stirring) speed. The optimal dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction conditions were 28 min of extraction time, 33 μL of methanol as dispersive solvent, 722 rotations per minute of agitation speed, 23% w/v sodium chloride concentration, and pH of 10.5. Under these conditions, good linearity for the analytes in the range from 0.1 to 100 μg/L with coefficients of determination (r²) from 0.988 to 0.998 were obtained. The limits of detection based on a signal‐to‐noise ratio of 3 were between 5.7 and 124 ng/L with corresponding relative standard deviations from 3.4 to 5.9% (n = 4). The relative recoveries of N‐nitroso‐di‐n‐propylamine, N‐nitrosopiperidine, and N‐nitroso di‐n‐butylamine from spiked groundwater and tap water samples at concentrations of 2 μg/L of each analyte (mean ± standard deviation, n = 3) were (93.9 ± 8.7), (90.6 ± 10.7), and (103.7 ± 8.0)%, respectively. The method was applied to determine the N‐nitrosamines in water samples of different complexities, such as tap water, and groundwater, before and after treatment, in a local water treatment plant.     

In situ ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction combined with ultra high performance liquid chromatography for determination of neonicotinoid insecticides in honey samples

An efficient in situ ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction followed by ultra‐performance liquid chromatography was developed to determine four neonicotinoid insecticides in wild and commercial honey samples. In this method, a hydrophobic ionic liquid 1‐butyl‐3‐methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate, formed by in situ reaction between potassium hexafluorophosphate and 1‐butyl‐3‐methylimidazolium bromide in sample solution, was used as the extraction solvent. In comparison with the traditional dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction method, the developed method required no dispersive solvent. To achieve high extraction efficiency and enrichment factor, the effects of various experimental parameters were studied in detail. Under the optimized conditions, the limits of detection and quantification were in the ranges of 0.30–0.62 and 1.20–2.50 μg/L, respectively. The method showed high enrichment factors (74–115) with the recoveries between 81.0 and 103.4%. The proposed method was finally applied to different wild and commercial honey samples.     

Macrocyclic polyamine‐functionalized silica as a solid‐phase extraction material coupled with ionic liquid dispersive liquid–liquid extraction for the enrichment of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

In this study, silica modified with a 30‐membered macrocyclic polyamine was synthesized and first used as an adsorbent material in SPE. The SPE was further combined with ionic liquid (IL) dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction (DLLME). Five polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons were employed as model analytes to evaluate the extraction procedure and were determined by HPLC combined with UV/Vis detection. Acetone was used as the elution solvent in SPE as well as the dispersive solvent in DLLME. The enrichment of analytes was achieved using the 1,3‐dibutylimidazolium bis[(trifluoromethyl)sulfonyl]imide IL/acetone/water system. Experimental conditions for the overall macrocycle‐SPE–IL‐DLLME method, such as the amount of adsorbent, sample solution volume, sample solution pH, type of elution solvent as well as addition of salt, were studied and optimized. The developed method could be successfully applied to the analysis of four real water samples. The macrocyclic polyamine offered higher extraction efficiency for analytes compared with commercially available C₁₈ cartridge, and the developed method provided higher enrichment factors (2768–5409) for model analytes compared with the single DLLME. Good linearity with the correlation coefficients ranging from 0.9983 to 0.9999 and LODs as low as 0.002 μg/L were obtained in the proposed method.