Accepted Manuscript Headspace mode of liquid phase microextraction: A review Mohammad Reza Afshar Mogaddam, Ali Mohebbi, Azar Pazhohan, Fariba Khodadadeian, Mir Ali Farajzadeh PII:
S0165-9936(18)30438-2
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2018.10.021
Reference:
TRAC 15285
To appear in:
Trends in Analytical Chemistry
Received Date: 27 August 2018 Revised Date:
17 October 2018
Accepted Date: 22 October 2018
Please cite this article as: M.R. Afshar Mogaddam, A. Mohebbi, A. Pazhohan, F. Khodadadeian, M.A. Farajzadeh, Headspace mode of liquid phase microextraction: A review, Trends in Analytical Chemistry, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2018.10.021. This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Headspace mode of liquid phase microextraction: A review
1
Mohammad Reza Afshar Mogaddam1,2 ,Ali Mohebbi3, Azar Pazhohan4, Fariba Khodadadeian2, Mir
2
Ali Farajzadeh3,5*
3
RI PT
4 Food and Drug Safety Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
5
2
Pharmaceutical Analysis Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran
6
3
Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran
7
4
Academic Center for Education, Culture and Research, East Azarbaijan, Tabriz, Iran
5
Engineering Faculty, Near East University, 99138 Nicosia, North Cyprus, Mersin 10, Turkey
TE D
M AN U
SC
1
8 9 10 11 12 13
Tel.: +98 41 33393084
14
EP
*Corresponding author: M.A. Farajzadeh
15
E–mail address:
[email protected];
[email protected]
16
AC C
Fax: +98 41 33340191
17 18 19 20 21 22 1
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 23
In recent years, liquid phase microextraction (LPME) as a solvent–minimized and microscale
24
implementation of sample pretreatment procedure of liquid–liquid extraction has been introduced and
25
obtained great attention among the researchers due to its simplicity, low cost, rapidity, and efficiency.
26
Developments have led to different approaches of LPME such as headspace mode of liquid phase
27
RI PT
Abstract
28
In HS mode of LPME, the extractant is suspended in the headspace of analytes solution and has no
29
contact with the sample solution which leads to eliminate interferences problem. The present review
30
discusses HS mode of LPME with the focus on its historical developments, principles, configurations,
31
inherent limitations, and pros and cons. Herein, recent analytical applications of the method used in
32
the isolation and trace enrichment prior to analysis of various compounds are reviewed. The future
33
direction of the researches in this field and general trend toward the commercial applications are also
34
considered.
35
TE D
M AN U
SC
microextraction (HS mode of LPME) which is used in the cases of volatile and semi–volatile analytes.
36 37 38
Single drop microextraction; Single drop microextraction
39
EP
Keywords: Headspace mode of liquid phase microextraction; Sample preparation; Miniaturization;
40 41
AC C
42 43 44 45 46 47
2
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 48 49
In recent years, the development of sensitive, fast, and accurate analytical methods has become a vital
50
issue in analytical chemistry. Despite the great instrumental advances, most of these equipment cannot
51
handle sample matrices directly and an additional step called sample preparation is needed. The basic
52
concept of this step is to enhance the concentration of target analytes (enrichment), reduce the
53
presence of matrix components (sample clean–up), and convert a sample into a format compatible
54
with analysis system, which indicates its importance in analyzing and determining the target analytes
55
SC
RI PT
1. Introduction
56
(LLE) and solid–phase extraction (SPE) have been widely used for this purpose. LLE suffers from
57
M AN U
especially in the cases of complex matrices. Classical treatments such as liquid–liquid extraction
58
automation and on–line connection to the analysis system. SPE is also time consuming and using
59
expensive and commercially limited cartridges which limited its use [1, 2]. Driven by the need to
60
circumvent these problems and cease the quest for novel sample pretreatment methods,
61
microextraction methods including solid phase microextraction (SPME), and liquid phase
62
microextraction (LPME) were developed. The general idea behind these methods is the elimination of
63
organic solvent consumption or great reduction in the ratio of the extraction solvent to sample
64
volume. SPME is a solvent–free process introduced in 1990 by Pawliszyn and is based on the
65
EP
TE D
some drawbacks such as high consumption of organic solvents, emulsion formation, difficulty in
66
[3]. This method is regarded as an accurate and sensitive sample pretreatment. Despite these
67
advantages, SPME is still relatively expensive, suffers from sample carry over problem, and the used
68
commercial fibers are fragile. LPME, a solvent–minimized and microscale implementation of sample
69
pretreatment procedure of LLE, can overcome these problems. It demands a little organic solvent,
70
requires inexpensive and simple device, and provides high enrichment factors. The principle of LPME
71
is based on the partitioning of analytes between sample matrix (donor phase) and an extraction solvent
72
(acceptor phase) [1]. Generally, there are two modes of LPME depending on the types of analytes
73
being extracted and the complexity of the matrix: direct LPME and headspace mode of liquid phase
74
AC C
partitioning of analytes between sample solution and a fused silica fiber coated with a stationary phase
3
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 75
Cantwell in which a single extracting solvent drop (8 µL of solvent) suspended on a Teflon rod
76
exposed with the stirred sample solution containing the analytes [4]. The analytes were enriched into
77
the organic solvent microdrop. This method is fast, simple, inexpensive, requires a little organic
78
solvent and produces a little waste. Disadvantage of this method, is that the extraction and injection
79
RI PT
microextraction (HS mode of LPME). The first mode of LPME was introduced by Jeannot and
80
was performed using a conventional microsyringe as the organic solvent holder by He and Lee [5]. In
81
this method, firstly 1 µL of an organic solvent was withdrawn into the microsyringe, and afterward
82
the microsyringe needle immersed in the liquid sample by passing through the sample vial septum. A
83
droplet of the solvent was suspended at the tip of the syringe needle in the stirred aqueous sample
84
containing the analytes. After performing the extraction procedure, the organic phase was withdrawn
85
back into the microsyringe and injected to the analytical instrument for quantification of the analytes.
86
The mentioned method is mostly recommended for the relatively clean samples (e.g. tap water or
87
groundwater) and the extraction of non–volatile compounds. In 2001, Theis et al. [6] introduced HS
88
mode of LPME as another version of LPME that simultaneously takes advantages of LPME and
89
TE D
M AN U
SC
have to be performed separately with different apparatus. To solve this problem, one year later, LPME
90
sample containing the analytes and thermostated at a given temperature for a pre–set extraction time.
91
The volatile and semi–volatile analytes are enriched into the organic solvent microdrop.
92
EP
conventional headspace sampling. In this method the extracting phase is placed above the stirred
93
and cons, and applications of HS mode of LPME as an efficient and widely used sample pretreatment
94
AC C
The aim of the present review was to discuss principles, configurations, limitations, automation, pros
method especially for analytes with relatively high vapor pressure. Finally, we look ahead to future
95
potential developments of this method.
96 97
2. Principles of HS mode of LPME
98
As its name implies, HS mode of LPME is a combination of headspace sampling and LPME in which
99
an acceptor (organic solvent) or extracting phase is placed above the stirred sample containing the
100
analytes at a given temperature. This method is recommended for the extraction of the volatile and
101
semi–volatile compounds. In HS mode of LPME, the extraction system consists of a microsyringe, a
102
4
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 103
mode of LPME, the vial containing the analytes is placed on a magnetic stirrer, then the needle tip of
104
microsyringe containing the organic solvent passed through the septum of the vial and fixed about
105
0.5–1.0 cm above the sample solution. Afterward, the sample solution is continuously agitated.
106
Actually, in this method, the analytes are distributed among three phases including the sample,
107
RI PT
vial containing the sample, a cap to avoid loss of the analytes and solvent, and a stirrer bar. In HS
108
injected into the analysis system for the quantitative analysis. The rate–determining step of the HS
109
mode of LPME is the transfer of the analytes from the sample to the headspace because diffusion rate
110
in the headspace is faster than that in the sample. Therefore, a high stirring speed is needed to improve
111
mass transfer among the phases by increasing the contact area of the analytes and extractant. In HS
112
mode of LPME, the parameters related to the donor and acceptor phases such as type and volume of
113
extraction solvent, sample volume, ionic strength, extraction time, stirring rate, temperature, and pH
114
of sample solution should be investigated and optimized. Among these factors, selection of extraction
115
solvent type is the most important one and there are some requirements and limitations in choosing an
116
appropriate solvent for HS mode of LPME. First of all, the selected solvent should possess a low
117
TE D
M AN U
SC
headspace, and organic solvent. Finally, the microsyringe needle is removed from the vial and
118
peak produced by the extractant should not interfere with the chromatographic peaks of the selected
119
analytes. Unlike immersion mode of LPME in which water–immiscible solvents are used, in the HS
120
EP
vapor pressure so that it does not evaporate during the extraction procedure. Furthermore, the solvent
121
extraction of analytes from an aqueous phase. But, in the case of the most of water–miscible solvents,
122
AC C
mode of LPME both of the water–immiscible and water–miscible solvents can be used for the
the drop size may increase during the extraction process causing the drop to fall from the needle. To
123
meet these requirements, in addition to the conventional organic solvents such as n–octanol, ionic
124
liquids (ILs) were also employed as the extraction solvent in HS mode of LPME, since they possess
125
high thermal stability and negligible vapor pressure. The other important factor is the temperature of
126
sample which can affect kinetics and thermodynamics of the HS mode of LPME process by varying
127
the Henry's constants and diffusion coefficients of analytes which lead to change the vapor pressure
128
and the concentration of the analytes in the headspace. Although other factors are not as important as
129
the type of extraction solvent and temperature of sample but they also need precise optimization.
130
5
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT These factors usually optimized using “one–variable–at–a–time” strategy or experimental designs
131
such as central composite design, Box–Behnken design or others to reach high enrichment factors
132
and extraction recoveries (ERs).
133 134
3. Configurations of HS mode of LPME
RI PT
135 136
different modes named as headspace single drop microextraction (HS–SDME), and hollow fiber (HF)
137
supported HS mode of LPME which will be discussed in the following sections. Different
138
configurations of these modes are schematically shown in Figure 1.
139
SC
HS mode of LPME attracted great attention since its introduction in 2001 and mainly classified in two
M AN U
3.1. HS–SDME
Fig. 1
140 141 142
microdrop HS mode of LPME or static HS–SDME, a microdrop of an organic solvent is suspended
143
from the needle tip of a gas chromatography (GC) microsyringe and the needle placed in the
144
headspace above a stirred sample thermostated at a given temperature for a pre–set extraction time
145
TE D
In the first and simplest version of HS mode of LPME developed by Theis et al. and known as
146
then is retracted back into the microsyringe and injected into GC for the identification and
147
quantification of the extracted analytes. Like all of the HS–based methods, the acceptor phase does
148
EP
[6]. The drop remains at the tip of the microsyringe throughout the period of extraction procedure and
149
no interference problem which makes analyte identification and quantification more reliable. In
150
AC C
not contact with the sample, and components of the sample matrix are mostly eliminated, so there is
addition, since solvent and a microsyringe only are involved, this method has the advantages of low
151
cost, ease of operation, and no carryover problem. Also, in comparison to the direct immersion mode,
152
the selection of extractant is flexible and there is no need to consider the solvent solubility in the
153
sample solution. Despite these advantages, like other sample pretreatment methods there are some
154
problems associated with this method. For instance, the surface area of the used organic solvent is
155
limited, therefore, low interfacial contact area between sample and extraction solvent may decrease
156
the extraction efficiency. In addition, the volume of the suspended organic solvent is limited because
157
there is no support for it, except microsyringe needle. Therefore, the organic solvent would detach
158
6
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 159
solve this problem, Shen and Lee in 2003, introduced a dynamic mode of HS–SDME in which an
160
organic solvent film is formed within a microsyringe barrel and used as the extraction interface [7]. In
161
this method, the spherical drop is transformed in a film and the extraction procedure takes place
162
within the microsyringe barrel. The extraction procedure comprised of drawing 2 µL of organic
163
RI PT
from the tip of the needle, so careful and elaborate manual operation is required in the experiment. To
164
passed through the vial septum and placed above the sample. Then, 5 µL of the gaseous sample was
165
withdrawn into microsyringe and maintained for a period of time, and then the plunger was depressed
166
back to the original mark. The same sampling process was repeated for 25 times. At the end, the
167
microsyringe needle was removed and injected into the GC for quantitative analysis. Compared to the
168
previous mode, the described method provided higher extraction efficiency within a short analysis
169
time [5, 7]. This attributed to very small space within the microsyringe barrel which led to the fast
170
equilibrium between gaseous analytes and the organic solvent film. Even though, there is no
171
individual review with the subject of HS–SDME but its different aspects were discussed in the
172
previously published reviews with the titles of SDME or LPME. For example, the principle and
173
TE D
M AN U
SC
solvent (cyclohexane) into a commercial GC microsyringe, afterward the microsyringe needle was
174
number of reviews were focused on the combination of SDME and its derivates like HS–
175
SDME with various analytical techniques such as ultraviolet–visible spectrophotometry [11]
176
EP
developments of HS–SDME were discussed in the published reviews [1, 8–10]. In addition, a
and chromatography [12].
177
AC C
178
3.2. HF supported HS mode of LPME
179
Another method termed as HF supported HS mode of LPME, in which the extractant droplet was held
180
above the sample with the aid of HF was introduced by Lee and co–workers in 2005 [13]. In this
181
method µL–level of an acceptor or extraction solvent was withdrawn into a microsyringe with the
182
conic needle tip. The sample vial septum was pierced by the microsyringe. Afterward, the needle tip
183
was inserted into a HF and then the fiber was immersed in the extractant for a few seconds in order to
184
impregnation of the porous wall. Then, the vial was placed in the position and capped so that the fiber
185
7
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 186
programmable syringe pump was used for moving the solvent within the fiber. The movement
187
facilitated mass transfer from the sample to the solvent. This method enabled the use of high solvent
188
volumes and the surface area of the extraction phase in contact with the headspace was increased
189
dramatically. In addition, because of low cost and simplicity of extraction device the HF can be
190
RI PT
together with the needle of microsyringe assembly was placed in the headspace region. In this study, a
changed after each experiment to avoid cross–contamination and carryover between extractions which
191
leads to high repeatability.
192
SC
4. Applications of HS mode of LPME 4.1. HS–SDME
193 194 195 196
for the extraction of compounds with relatively high vapor pressure. In the first report of HS–SDME,
197
benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylene (BTEX) were extracted into the suspended n–octanol drop
198
[6]. In this method a single drop was hanged from the tip of a syringe and after extraction, the drop
199
was sucked into the syringe and used for analysis. This method was the classical form of HS–SDME
200
TE D
M AN U
After introducing SDME methods, its performance in HS–SDME mode has attracted more attentions
201
[16], ammonia [17], amphetamine and methamphetamine [18], BTEX [19], butyltin compounds [20],
202
chloride [21], cyanide [22], chlorobenzene [23], fluoride [24], methylcyclopentadienyl–manganese
203
EP
and it was used for the extraction of many compounds including acetone [14], n–alkanes [15], amitraz
204
mononitrotoluenes [30], organophosphorus pesticides [31], polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
205
AC C
tricarbonyl [25], valporic acid [26], phenolic compounds [27], bromide [28], methylmercury [29],
[32, 33], selenium [34], and short chain fatty acids [35]. In these methods, the extracted analytes into
206
drop were analyzed by separation methods such as GC, high performance liquid chromatography or
207
capillary electrophoresis and spectrometry methods such as atomic absorption spectrometry, or
208
ultraviolet spectrophotometry). Designing electrochemical sensors for the analysis of the selected
209
analytes after HS–SDME was considered as another instrumental analysis. In some procedures,
210
derivatization step was done before the analysis to enhance the analytes volatility or detectability. In
211
different papers, derivatization process was occurred simultaneously or asynchronous with HS–
212
SDME. Determination of acetone [36], aliphatic amines [37], carbonyl compounds [38], amphetamine
213
8
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 214
performed using simultaneous derivatization and HS–SDME. For this purpose, the derivatization
215
reagents were mixed with the used extraction solvent and the mixture was placed at the tip of a
216
syringe to contact with the analytes in the headspace of solution. The analytes were derivatized in
217
drop along with dissolving into it [42]. In all of these methods, the effective parameters were
218
RI PT
and methylenedioxyamphetamine [39], volatile organic acids [40], and hexanal and heptanal [41] was
219
on the employing high–viscosity extraction solvents with low volatility like ILs to overcome some
220
disadvantages of the classical HS–SDME such as drop instability, limited drop size, and evaporation
221
of the drop. In the first report in 2003, a few microliters of 1–octyl–3–methylimidazolium
222
hexafluorophosphate was suspended from tip of a syringe and PAHs were extracted into the used ILs
223
[43]. The efficiency of this method was compared with the classical HS–SDME performed with n–
224
octanol and the results showed that longer extraction time and much larger drop volume were
225
accessible in IL–based HS–SDME. This procedure was developed for the determination of
226
chlorinated anilines from environmental water samples [44]. In this method extraction was performed
227
in an elevated temperature in order to transfer the analytes to the headspace of solution,. Recently, a
228
TE D
M AN U
SC
optimized using “one–variable–at–a–time” strategy. In recent advances, a number of papers focused
229
[45] and chlorobenzenes [46] followed by GC determination. In these methods the magnetic ILs were
230
held at the bottom of a rod–shaped magnet and it was fixed in the headspace of sample solution. After
231
EP
magnetic rod along with magnetic ILs were used instead of syringe for the determination of alkanes
232
analytes were desorbed from ILs by thermal desorption. This method showed high sensitivity and
233
AC C
extraction of the analytes into the ILs, the magnetic rod was placed in mobile phase track and the
simplicity and considered as a green method owing to use ILs. Analytical features of the developed
234
HS–SDME methods are shown in Table 1. A number of reviews were focused on the applications of
235
SDME and its various types in different fields [47], and on specific areas including the determination
236
of pesticide residues [48].
237 Table 1
238
4.2. Microwave/ultrasonic–assisted HS mode of LPME
239
Transferring analytes to the headspace of sample solution is an important parameter in the success of
240
an HS mode of LPME method. Usually stirring of the sample solution is performed for this purpose.
241
9
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 242
extraction of chlorobenzenes from water samples. In this paper the HS–SDME procedure was
243
performed in a microwave oven and the analytes transferring into the extraction solvent was strongly
244
increased. In this method high ERs were obtained compared to the case that the microwave
245
irradiations were not used. In other work instead of microwave irradiations, the efficiency of HS mode
246
RI PT
In 2007, Canals and co–workers [49] developed microwave–assisted–HS–SDME procedure for
247
preconcentrate chlorophenols from aqueous samples [50]. In this method, a cone–shaped tube was
248
used to hold the extraction solvent droplet and more solvent could be suspended in the tube than
249
microsyringe due to the larger interfacial tension. The results showed that the analysis sensitivity was
250
significantly improved with the increasing the extractant volume. In another published paper,
251
sonication was used in the formation of aerosols of sample solution and their transferring into the
252
extraction solvent [51]. In fact, in this method the sample solution was nebulized into the headspace
253
of the solution and the aerosols of the sample solution was transferred into the solvent. Some
254
characteristics of the methods are listed in Table 2.
255 Table 2
TE D
M AN U
SC
of LPME procedure was enhanced with the aid of sonication and the developed method was used to
256 257
HF supported HS mode of LPME is another form of HS based methods in which the extraction
258
solvent is placed in the pores of an HF. In this method some disadvantages of HS–SDME like drop
259
EP
4.3. HF supported HS mode of LPME
260
method was developed for the extraction and preconcentration of PAHs from soil samples [13]. In this
261
AC C
instability and solvent loss are removed. In 2005, for the first time, HF–based HS mode of LPME
paper n–octanol was placed in the pores of an HF and inserted in the headspace of soil sample. The
262
volatile PAHs were extracted into the n–octanol and then the extractant was injected into the analysis
263
system. In this method large volume of extraction solvent could be used instead of drop–based HS–
264
SDME method. Up to know, this method was developed for the extraction of organochlorine
265
pesticides [52], residual monomers in latex [53], and volatile organic compounds [54]. In 2009, HF–
266
based HS mode of LPME along with derivatization was used for the determination of free cyanide in
267
biological samples [55]. In this work, the derivatization reagent and extraction solvent were placed in
268
the pores of the HF and the analyte was derivatized in the HF.
269
10
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 270 271
In the past years, in order to stabilize the suspended drop and enabling the application of larger drop
272
volume in HS–SDME, various modifications of the syringe–needle tip such as bell–mouthed device
273
[56], flange rod [57], stainless steel net [58] and brass funnel [59] have been used. In 2016, Zaruba et
274
RI PT
4.4. New configuration in HS mode of LPME method
275
spectrophotometer for determination of sulfite in the food samples [60]. This approach avoids the
276
necessity of handling the drop between the extraction and detection steps and enables the online
277
monitoring of the entire extraction process which makes the analysis simpler and less time–
278
consuming. In 2016, Farajzadeh et al. [61] developed a new home–made extraction device for
279
M AN U
SC
al. used an optical probe as a microdrop holder in HS–SDME procedure in combination with a
280
containing µL–level of an extraction solvent was inserted in the headspace of sample solution. This
281
method is dynamic form of HS mode of LPME due to continuously passing of the analytes through
282
the extraction vessel. The developed method was successfully used for the determination of 1,4–
283
dioxane in shampoo [62], pyridine as a decomposition product in ceftazidime and mouthwash solution
284
TE D
performing HS mode of LPME method. In this method, a GC liner shaped extraction vessel
285
performed using a paper–based analytical device for the extraction of hydrogen sulfide from fuel oils
286
[65]. In this method instead of a microsyringe, a deflagrating spoon was used to hold the extraction
287 288 289
AC C
solvent drop.
EP
[63], and residual solvents in pharmaceuticals [64]. Recently a new HS mode of LPME method was
5. Automation of HS mode of LPME
290
A significant useful aspect of implementing the microextraction methods in analytical laboratories is
291
the automation of these techniques which can lead to improve via ease of the operation and to achieve
292
high repeatability in sample extraction. Also, a large number of samples can be analyzed by the
293
automated techniques. So, with the advent of microextraction methods, attempts were made to
294
automate them and the first automated drop–based system was developed in 1995 [66]. After that,
295
several automated systems involving extraction of target analytes into an immersed single drop or
296
11
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 297
automated system was published in 2006 for the extraction and preconcentration of BTEX from
298
aqueous samples [69]. For this purpose, the plunger of a syringe was connected to a rotating disk
299
motor and the syringe containing a thin film of an organic solvent was contacted with the headspace
300
of sample solution. The analytes in headspace of the solution was extracted into the thin film while
301
RI PT
liquid film were developed [67, 68] in the case of HS mode of LPME. The first report of fully
302
operation considerably improved the surface area of the boundary using a very small amount of an
303
extraction solvent, thereby the extraction efficiency was increased. The use of a commercial
304
autosampler for the HS mode of LPME was considered in the other work in the determination of ten
305
musk fragrance from environmental samples [70]. In this method, a few microliters of 1–octyl–3–
306
methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate was suspended from tip of an autosampler plunger and after
307
extraction it was injected into separation system. Good repeatability and extraction efficiency were
308
obtained, comparable with manual HS mode of LPME with apparent saving in human effort. In other
309
work, the efficiency of the mentioned method was compared with automated–SPME for extraction of
310
the residual solvents from edible oil samples and the results showed that high sensitivity and good
311
TE D
M AN U
SC
this film reformed on the inner surface of the syringe each time the plunger was pulled back. This
repeatability were obtainable [71].
EP
6. Future remarks
312 313 314 315
compounds has attracted great attention since its invention. Some disadvantages of this method can be
316
AC C
HS mode of LPME as an efficient technique for the extraction of volatile and semi–volatile
removed by designing special instruments to hold extraction solvent drop. The use of deep eutectic
317
solvents as green and novel solvents is anticipated due to their similar properties with ILs. On the
318
other hand, combination of other microextraction techniques with HS mode of LPME is still very
319
limited and it is expected that many studies will be taken up in this field.
320 321
7. Conclusions
322
In this work development of different HS mode of LPME methods including HS–SDME and HF–HS
323
mode of LPME and their applications for the extraction and preconcentration of different compounds
324
12
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 325
methods as environmentally friendly procedures. These methods were automated by different sets up
326
and therefore their use in routine analytical experiments is possible. On the other hand, extraction of
327
different analytes from solid samples can be performed easily. These methods are still admired and
328
their new improvements are in progress.
329
RI PT
in the various samples were reviewed. The use of ILs as the extraction solvent classifies these
Acknowledgements
330 331 332
References:
333
SC
The authors thank the Research Council of Tabriz University for the financial support.
334
[2] J. Plotka–Wasylka, N. Szczepańska, M. Guardia, J. Namieśnik, Miniaturized solid–phase
335
extraction techniques, Trends Anal. Chem. 73 (2015) 19–38.
336
[3] C.L. Arthur, J. Pawliszyn, Solid phase microextraction with thermal desorption using fused silica
337
optical fibers, Anal. Chem. 62 (1990) 2145–2148.
338
[4] M.A. Jeannot, F.F. Cantwell, Solvent microextraction into a single drop, Anal. Chem. 68 (1996)
339
2236–2240.
TE D
M AN U
[1] A.S. Yazdi, A. Amiri, Liquid–phase microextraction, Trends Anal. Chem. 29 (2010) 1–14.
340 341
conventional microsyringe, Anal. Chem. 69 (1997) 4634–4640.
342
EP
[5] Y. He, H.K. Lee, Liquid–phase microextraction in a single drop of organic solvent by using a
343
Chem. 73 (2001) 5651–5654.
344
AC C
[6] A.L. Theis, A.J. Waldack, S.M. Hansen, M.A. Jeannot, Headspace solvent microextraction, Anal.
[7] G. Shen, H.K. Lee, Headspace liquid–phase microextraction of chlorobenzenes in soil with gas
345
chromatography–electron capture detection, Anal. Chem. 75 (2003) 98–103.
346
[8] A. Jain, K.K. Verma, Recent advances in applications of single–drop microextraction: a review,
347
Anal. Chim. Acta 706 (2011) 37–65.
348
[9] J.M. Kokosa, Recent trends in using single–drop microextraction and related techniques in green
349
analytical methods, Trends Anal. Chem. 71 (2015) 194–204.
350
[10] S. Tang, T. Qi, P.D. Ansah, J.C.N. Fouemina, W. Shen, C. Basheer, H.K. Lee, Single–drop
351
microextraction, Trends Anal. Chem. 108 (2018) 306–313.
352
13
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 353
and
354
direct immersion single–drop microextraction with chromatographic techniques, J. Sep. Sci. 36 (2013)
355
3758–3768.
356
[12] V. Andruch, L. Kocúrová, I.S. Balogh, J. Škrlíková, Recent advances in coupling single–drop
357
RI PT
[11] L. Kocurova, I.S. Balogh, V. Andruch, A glance at achievements in the coupling of headspace
and
358
dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction with UV–vis spectrophotometry and related detection
359
techniques, Microchem. J. 102 (2012) 1–10.
360 361
phase microextraction, J. Chromatogr. A 1087 (2005) 289–294.
362
[14] N. Cabaleiro, I. Calle, C. Bendicho, I. Lavilla, Coumarins as turn on/off fluorescent probes for
363
detection of residual acetone in cosmetics following headspace single–drop microextraction. Talanta
364
129 (2014) 113–118.
365
M AN U
SC
[13] X.M. Jiang, C. Basheer, J. Zhang, H.K. Lee, Dynamic hollow fiber–supported headspace liquid–
366
headspace solvent microextraction and gas chromatography. J. Hazard. Mater. 136 (2006) 714–720.
367
TE D
[15] M. Khalili Zanjani, Y. Yamini, S. Shariati, Analysis of n–alkanes in water samples by means of
368
chromatographic thermionic specific detector determination of amitraz in honey after hydrolysis to
369
2,4–dimethylaniline. J. Food Com. Anal. 21 (2008) 264–270.
370
EP
[16] M. Shamsipur, J. Hassan, J. Salar–Amoli, Y. Yamini, Headspace solvent microextraction–gas
371
ammonia using headspace single–drop microextraction. Microchem. J. 86 (2007) 48–52.
372
AC C
[17] B. Pranaitytė, S. Jermak, E. Naujalis, A. Padarausk, Capillary electrophoretic determination of
[18] Y. He, Y. Kang, Single drop liquid–liquid–liquid microextraction of methamphetamine and
373
amphetamine in urine. J. Chromatogr. A 1133 (2006) 35–40.
374
[19] A. Przyjazny, J.M. Kokosa, Analytical characteristics of the determination of benzene, toluene,
375
ethylbenzene and xylenes in water by headspace solvent microextraction. J. Chromatogr. A 977
376
(2002) 143–153.
377
[20] Q. Xiao, B. Hu, M. He, Speciation of butyltin compounds in environmental and biological
378
samples using headspace single drop microextraction coupled with gas chromatography–inductively
379
coupled plasma–mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A 1211 (2008) 135–141.
380
14
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 381
based cuvetteless micro–spectrophotometry for the determination of chloride involving oxidation with
382
permanganate. Talanta 80 (2010) 1816–1822.
383
[22] A. Jain, A.K.K.V. Pillai, N. Sharma, K.K. Verma, Headspace single–drop microextraction and
384
cuvetteless microspectrophotometry for the selective determination of free and total cyanide involving
385
RI PT
[21] A.K.K.V. Pillai, A. Jain, K.K. Verma, Headspace single–drop microextraction and fibre optics–
reaction with ninhydrin. Talanta 82 (2010) 758–765.
386 387
and gas chromatography–electron capture detection. J. Chromatogr. A 1125 (2006) 129–132.
388
[24] H. Yiping, W. Caiyun, Ion chromatography for rapid and sensitive determination of fluoride in
389
milk after headspace single–drop microextraction with in situ generation of volatile hydrogen
390
fluoride. Anal Chim. Acta 661 (2010) 161–166.
391
M AN U
SC
[23] A. Tor, Determination of chlorobenzenes in water by drop–based liquid–phase microextraction
392
microextraction of methylcyclopentadienyl–manganese tricarbonyl from water samples followed by
393
gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. Talanta 74 (2007) 47–51.
394
[26] P. Shahdousti, A. Mohammadi, N. Alizadeh, Determination of valproic acid in human serum and
395
TE D
[25] F.J. Pena Pereira, C. Bendicho, N. Kalogerakis, E. Psillakis, Headspace single drop
396
ionization detection without prior derivatization. J. Chromatogr. B 850 (2007) 128–133.
397
[27] A.A. Rincón, V. Pino, J.H. Ayala, A.M. Afonso, Headspace–single drop microextraction (HS–
398
EP
pharmaceutical preparations by headspace liquid–phase microextraction gas chromatography–flame
399
content of alkyl– and methoxy–phenolic compounds in biomass smoke. Talanta 85 (2011) 1265–
400
1273.
AC C
SDME) in combination with high–performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) to evaluate the
401
[28] A. García–Figueroa, F. Pena–Pereira, I. Lavilla, C. Bendicho, Headspace single–drop
402
microextraction coupled with microvolume fluorospectrometry for highly sensitive determination of
403
bromide. Talanta 170 (2017) 9–14.
404
[29] S. Gil, S. Fragueiro, I. Lavilla, C. Bendicho, Determination of methylmercury by electrothermal
405
atomic absorption spectrometry using headspace single–drop microextraction with in situ hydride
406
generation. Spectrochim. Acta B 60 (2005) 145–150.
407
15
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 408
solvent microextraction to the analysis of mononitrotoluenes in waste water samples. Talanta 72
409
(2007) 193–198.
410
[31] Q. Xiao, B. Hu, C. Yu, L. Xia, Z. Jiang, Optimization of a single–drop microextraction procedure
411
for the determination of organophosphorus pesticides in water and fruit juice with gas
412
RI PT
[30] H. Ebrahimzadeh, Y. Yamini, F. Kamarei, M.R. Khalili–Zanjani, Application of headspace
413
[32] S. Shariati–Feizabadi, Y. Yamini, N. Bahramifar, Headspace solvent microextraction and gas
414
chromatographic determination of some polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in water samples. Anal.
415
Chim. Acta 489 (2003) 21–31.
416
SC
chromatography–flame photometric detection. Talanta 69 (2006) 848–855.
417
the determination of trace polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in environmental samples. Talanta 74
418
(2008) 470–477.
419
M AN U
[33] Y. Wu, L. Xia, R. Chen, B. Hu, Headspace single drop microextraction combined with HPLC for
420
microextraction–electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry method for determination of selenium
421
in waters after photoassisted prereduction. Talanta 68 (2006) 1096–1101.
422
TE D
[34] S. Fragueiro, I. Lavilla, C. Bendicho, Hydride generation–headspace single–drop
423
microextraction coupled with gas chromatography for the determination of short–chain fatty acids in
424
RuO4 oxidation products of asphaltenes. J. Chromatogr. A 1217 (2010) 3561–3566.
425
EP
[35] Y. Li, Y. Xiong, Q. Liang, C. Fang, C. Wang, Application of headspace single–drop
426
headspace single–drop microextraction and simultaneous derivatization for fast determination of the
427
AC C
[36] L. Dong, X. Shen, C. Deng, Development of gas chromatography–mass spectrometry following
diabetes biomarker, acetone in human blood samples. Anal. Chim. Acta 569 (2006) 91–96.
428
[37] C. Deng, N. Li, L. Wang, X. Zhang, Development of gas chromatography–mass spectrometry
429
following headspace single–drop microextraction and simultaneous derivatization for fast
430
determination of short–chain aliphatic amines in water samples. J. Chromatogr. A 1131 (2006) 45–50.
431
[38] Y.C. Fiamegos, C.D. Stalikas, Gas chromatographic determination of carbonyl compounds in
432
biological and oil samples by headspace single–drop microextraction with in–drop derivatization.
433
Anal. Chim. Acta 609 (2008) 175–183.
434
16
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 435
methylenedioxyamphetamine in urine with headspace liquid–phase microextraction followed by gas
436
chromatography–mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A 1185 (2008) 19–22.
437
[40] S.H. Sun, J.P. Xie, F.W. Xie, Y.L. Zong, Determination of volatile organic acids in oriental
438
tobacco by needle–based derivatization headspace liquid–phase microextraction coupled to gas
439
RI PT
[39] J.S. Chiang, S.D. Huang, Simultaneous derivatization and extraction of amphetamine and
440
[41] N. Li, C. Deng, X. Yin, N. Yao, X. Zhang, Gas chromatography–mass spectrometric analysis of
441
hexanal and heptanal in human blood by headspace single–drop microextraction with droplet
442
derivatization. Anal. Biochem. 342 (2005) 318–326.
443
SC
chromatography/mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A 1179 (2008) 89–95.
444
derivatization for the determination of haloacetic acids in water sample by gas chromatography–mass
445
spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A 1216 (2009) 1059–1066.
446
[43] J. Liu, G. Jiang, Y. Chi, Y. Cai, Q. Zhou, J.T. Hu, Use of ionic liquids for liquid–phase
447
microextraction of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Anal. Chem. 75 (2003) 5870–5876.
448
[44] J. Peng, J. Liu, G. Jiang, C. Tai, M. Huang, Ionic liquid for high temperature headspace liquid–
449
TE D
M AN U
[42] M. Saraji, A.A. Hajialiakbari Bidgoli, Single–drop microextraction with in–micro vial
phase microextraction of chlorinated anilines in environmental water samples. J. Chromatogr. A 1072
450
(2005) 3–6.
451
EP
[45] M.J. Trujillo–Rodríguez, V. Pino, J. L. Anderson, Magnetic ionic liquids as extraction solvents in
452 453
[46] E. Fernández, L. Vidal, A. Canals, Hydrophilic magnetic ionic liquid for magnetic headspace
454
AC C
vacuum headspace single–drop microextraction. Talanta 172 (2017) 86–94.
single–drop microextraction of chlorobenzenes prior to thermal desorption–gas chromatography–mass
455
spectrometry. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 410 (2018) 4679–4687.
456
[47] M.A. Jeannot, A. Przyjazny, J.M. Kokosa, Single drop microextraction–development,
457
applications
458
and future trends, J. Chromatogr. A 1217 (2010) 2326–2336.
459
[48] Y.B. Pakade, D.K. Tewary, Development and applications of single–drop microextraction for
460
pesticide residue analysis: A review, J. Sep. Sci. 33 (2010) 3683–3691.
461
17
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 462
drop microextration of chlorobenzenes from water samples. Anal. Chim. Acta 592 (2007) 9–15.
463
[50] H. Xu, Y. Liao, J. Yao, Development of a novel ultrasound–assisted headspace liquid–phase
464
microextraction and its application to the analysis of chlorophenols in real aqueous samples. J.
465
Chromatogr. A 1167 (2007) 1–8.
466
RI PT
[49] L. Vidal, C. E. Domini, N. Grané, E. Psillakis, A. Canals, Microwave–assisted headspace single–
467
headspace single drop microextraction and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry for analysis of the
468
essential oil in Cuminum cyminum L. Anal. Chim. Acta 647 (2009) 72–77.
469
[52] S.P. Huang, S.D. Huang, Determination of organochlorine pesticides in water using solvent
470
cooling assisted dynamic hollow–fiber–supported headspace liquid–phase microextraction. J.
471
Chromatogr. A 1176 (2007) 19–25.
472
M AN U
SC
[51] L. Wang, Z. Wang, H. Zhang, X. Li, H. Zhang, Ultrasonic nebulization extraction coupled with
473
Determination of residual monomers in latex by headspace hollow fiber protected liquid–phase
474
microextraction combined with high–performance liquid chromatography. Polym. Test 31 (2012)
475
297–303.
476
TE D
[53] S.M. Taghizadeh, Y. Yamini, M.H. Naeeni, F. Mohamadnia, R. Sardeh Moghadam,
477
water using headspace knotted hollow fiber microextraction. J. Chromatogr. A 1395 (2015) 41–47.
478
[55] L. Meng, X. Liu, B. Wang, G. Shen, Z. Wang, M. Guo, Simultaneous derivatization and
479
EP
[54] P.S. Chen, Y.H. Tseng, Y.L. Chuang, J.H. Chen, Determination of volatile organic compounds in
480
liquid–phase microextraction followed by capillary electrophoresis with UV detection. J, Chromatogr.
481
AC C
extraction of free cyanide in biological samples with home–made hollow fiber–protected headspace
B 877 (2009) 3645–3651.
482
[56] C. Ye, Q. Zhou, X. Wang, Improved single–drop microextraction for high sensitive analysis, J.
483
Chromatogr. A 1139 (2007) 7–13.
484
[57] N. Sharma, A. Jain, V.K. Singh, K.K. Verma, Solid–phase extraction combined with headspace
485
single–drop microextraction of chlorophenols as their methyl ethers and analysis by high–
486
performance liquid chromatography–diode array detection, Talanta 83 (2011) 994–999.
487
[58] R. Batlle, P. López, C. Nerín, C. Crescenzi, Active single–drop microextraction for the
488
determination of gaseous diisocyanates, J. Chromatogr. A 1185 (2008) 155–160.
489
18
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 490
capture detection, J. Chromatogr. A 1134 (2006) 32–37.
491
[60] S. Zaruba, A.B. Vishnikin, J. Škrlíková, V. Andruch, Using an optical probe as the microdrop
492
holder in headspace single drop microextraction: determination of sulfite in food samples. Anal.
493
Chem. 88 (2016) 10296–10300.
494
RI PT
[59] L. Qian, Y. He, Funnelform single–drop microextraction for gas chromatography–electron–
495
dynamic headspace–liquid phase microextraction method performed in a home–made extraction
496
vessel for extraction and preconcentration of 1,4–dioxane from shampoo. J. Iran. Chem. Soc. 13
497
(2016) 1385–1393.
498
SC
[61] M.A. Farajzadeh, P. Nassiry, M.R. Afshar Mogaddam, A.A. Alizadeh Nabil, Development of
499
headspace liquid–phase microextraction method. Chromatographia 79 (2016) 773–779.
500
[63] M.A. Farajzadeh, A. Yadeghari, H. Dehghani, S. Dastmalchi, Determination of pyridine as a
501
decomposition product in ceftazidime and mouthwash solution. Chromatographia 80 (2017) 497–502.
502
[64] M.A. Farajzadeh, H. Dehghani, A. Yadeghari, L. Khoshmaram, Extraction and preconcentration
503
of residual solvents in pharmaceuticals using dynamic headspace–liquid phase microextraction and
504
TE D
M AN U
[62] M.A. Farajzadeh, P. Nassiry, M.R. Afshar Mogaddam, Development of a new dynamic
their determination by gas chromatography–flame ionization detection. Biomed Chromatogr. 31
505
(2017) e3788.
506
EP
[65] D. Nechaeva, A. Shishov, S. Ermakov, A. Bulatov, A paper–based analytical device for the
507 508
cyclic voltammetry. Talanta 183 (2018) 290–296.
509
AC C
determination of hydrogen sulfide in fuel oils based on headspace liquid–phase microextraction and
[66] S. Liu, P.K. Dasgupta, Liquid droplet. A renewable gas sampling interface, Anal. Chem. 67
510
(1995) 2042–2049.
511
[67] H. Liu, P.K. Dasgupta, Analytical chemistry in a drop, Trends Anal. Chem. 15 (1996) 468–475.
512
[68] H. Liu, P.K. Dasgupta, A Liquid Drop: what is it good for? Microchem. J. 57 (1997) 127–136.
513
[69] A. Mohammadi, N. Alizadeh, Automated dynamic headspace organic solvent film
514
microextraction for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene: Renewable liquid film as a sampler by
515
a programmable motor. J. Chromatogr. A 1107 (2006) 19–28.
516
19
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 517
microextraction coupled to GC–MS/MS to determine musk fragrances in environmental water
518
samples. Talanta 99 (2012) 824–832.
519
[71] W. Li, Y. Wang, X. Hao, R. Jiang, F. Zhu, G. Ouyang, Comparison of fully–automated
520
headspace single drop microextraction and headspace solid phase microextraction techniques for rapid
521
RI PT
[70] L. Vallecillos, E. Pocurull, F. Borrull, Fully automated ionic liquid–based headspace single drop
Figure caption:
M AN U
SC
analysis of No. 6 solvent residues in edible oil. Microchem. J. 117 (2014) 187–193.
522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530
HF supported HS mode of LPME.
531
AC C
EP
TE D
Fig. 1. Configurations of HS mode of LPME: (A) static HS–SDME, (B) dynamic HS–SDME, and (C)
20
532 533 534
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 1. Applications of HS–SDME method for the determination of different compounds. Analytical technique
LOD a)
EF b)
RSD% c)
References
Ethanol in water (40%, w/v)
Fluorospectrometer
–
5.0
[9]
Water samples
n–Dodecane
GC–FID d)
55–809
2.3–7.2
[10]
Amitraz
Honey
n–Dodecane
GC–TSD e)
–
4.8–7.7
[11]
Ammonia
Human blood, seawater and milk
Phosphoric acid (0.5 mM)
CE f)
14
5.3
[12]
Amphetamine and methamphetamine
Urine samples
Octane
500–730
5–7
[13]
BTEX
Water samples
n–Hexadecane
–
6.9–9.6
[14]
Butyltin compounds
–
1.1–10.1
[15]
Chloride
Environmental and biological samples Water and salts
–
5.6
[16]
Cyanide
Water sample
Ninhydrin dissolved in carbonate buffer
Microspectrophotometry
–
3.9
[17]
Chlorobenzenes
Water samples
n–Hexane
GC–ECD j)
–
<6
[18]
Fluoride
Milk
Sodium carbonate (9 mM)
Ion chromatography
97
0.24–1.0
[19]
Methylcyclopentadienyl–manganese tricarbonyl Valporic acid
Water samples
Octane
GC–MS k)
2100
6.4
[20]
n–Dodecane
GC–FID
0.26 (µg g–1) 0.1–4.0 (ng mL–1) 10 (ng g–1) 25.5 (ng mL–1) 0.5 (ng mL–1) 0.72–5.0 (ng mL–1) 8×10 -4–0.0014 (ng mL–1) 2.8 (ng mL–1) 4.3 (ng mL–1) 0.004–0.008 (ng mL–1) 3.8 (ng mL–1) 0.21 (ng mL–1) 800 (ng mL–1) 0.35–5.8 (ng mL–1) 1.3 (ng mL–1)
27
<13.2
[21]
–
0.7–7.4
[22]
243
4.4
[23]
40
7.0
[24]
103–142
–
[25]
23–109
1.7–10
[26]
9–159
–
[27]
n–Alkanes
Bromide
Water samples
Methyl mercury
Water sample
Mononitrotoluenes
Wastewater
Organophosphorus pesticides
Water and fruit juices samples
PAHs
Water samples
PAHs
Environmental samples
Se
Water samples
Short–chain fatty acids
Asphaltenes
Water
GC–FID
GC–ICP–MS h) UV–Vis i)
n–Dodecane
HPLC–UV
20 µM fluorescein aqueous solution containing dimethyl formamide 2% (v/v) HCl solution (1 M)
Fluorospectrometer
n–Amyl alcohol
GC–FID
Toluene
GC–FPD m)
1–Butanol
GC–FID
Aqueous solution of β–cyclodextrin
HPLC–UV
1.5–28 (ng mL–1)
18–53
5.6–7.1
[28]
30 mg L–1 of Pd (NO3)2 in 1.5% (w/v) HNO3 1–Butanol
ET–AAS
0.15 (ng mL–1) 0.02–0.3 (ng mL–1)
25
3.0
[29]
–
3.7–5.0
[30]
AC C
EP
Phenolic compounds
Human serum and pharmaceutical preparations Biomass smoke
Decane
HPLC–UV g)
SC
Cosmetic samples
M AN U
Acetone
TE D
Sample
RI PT
Extraction solvent
Analytes
ET–AAS l)
GC–FID
4.0 (ng mL–1) 0.02–0.06 (ng mL–1) 0.21–0.56 (ng mL–1) 4–41 (ng mL–1)
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
a) Limit of detection b) Enrichment factor c) Relative standard deviation d) Gas chromatography–flame ionization detector e) Gas chromatography–thermionic specific detector f) Capillary electrophoresis g) High performance liquid chromatography–ultraviolet detector h) Gas chromatography–inductively coupled plasma–mass spectrometry i) Ultraviolet–visible spectrometry j) Gas chromatography–electron capture detector k) Gas chromatography–mass spectrometry l) Electrothermal–atomic absorption spectrometry m) Gas chromatography–flame photometric detector
MANUSCRIPT Table 2. Applications of microwave/ultrasonic–assisted HS mode of LPME for ACCEPTED the determination of different compounds. Analytical technique
LOD a)
RSD% b)
RR% c)
References
Water samples
[C6MIM] [PF6]
HPLC–PDA d)
0.016–0.039 (ng mL–1)
2.3–8.3
81.7–105.5
[49]
Chlorophenols
Water samples
Acetonitrile 50% (v/v)
HPLC–UV e)
6–23 (ng mL–1)
2.4–9.1
84.6–100.7
[50]
Essential oil
Cuminum cyminum L.
6.67–14.8 (pL L–1)
–
–
[51]
Sample
Chlorobenzenes
n–Heptadecane
GC–MS f)
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
a) Limit of detection b) Relative standard deviation c) Relative recovery d) High performance liquid chromatography– photodiode array e) High performance liquid chromatography– ultraviolet detector f) Gas chromatography–mass spectrometry
RI PT
Extraction solvent
Analytes
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
RI PT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Highlights ► Historical developments and principles of HS mode of LPME have been reviewed. ►Pros and cons of HS mode have been discussed.
AC C
EP
TE D
M AN U
SC
► Future potential developments have been prospected.
RI PT
► Analytical applications and automation have been covered.