Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

, Volume 406, Issue 5, pp 1493–1507 | Cite as

Monitoring the extraction of additives and additive degradation products from polymer packaging into solutions by multi-residue method including solid phase extraction and ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry analysis

  • Charlène Pouech
  • Florent Lafay
  • Laure Wiest
  • Robert Baudot
  • Didier Léonard
  • Cécile Cren-OlivéEmail author
Research Paper


The use of polymer materials in industry for product packaging is increasing. The presence of additives in the polymer matrix enables the modification or improvement of the properties and performance of the polymer, but these industries are concerned regarding the extractability of these additives. The quantification of these additives is particularly challenging because of the presence of these substances as contaminants in all the analytical equipment and the diversity of their physicochemical properties. In this context, a multi-residue analytical method was developed for the trace analysis of the twenty main additives (and their degradation products) authorized in plastic products such as pharmaceutical packaging (e.g., antioxidants, release agents, and light absorbers). This analytical method consisted of a solid phase extraction (SPE) followed by an analysis using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography coupled to a tandem mass spectrometer (UHPLC-MS/MS). A comparison of two ionization interfaces and the optimization of the extraction procedure were discussed. The influence of the quality of the solvent type (distilled versus not distilled) and the nature of the SPE cartridges (Polypropylene versus Teflon®) were demonstrated. The optimized method exhibited a quantification limit lower than 20 ng mL−1 and recoveries between 70 % and 120 % for all compounds. Finally, the method was validated according to the ICH directive and was subsequently applied to the extraction of polymers under different pH conditions and storage temperatures. To the best of our knowledge, this study presents the first methodology allowing the simultaneous quantification of 24 additives at low ng mL−1.


UHPLC-MS/MS, ultra-high performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry Migration Polymer Plastic Packaging Additives 



The authors thank the Regional Rhône-Alpes Council, the FUI of the DGCIS, the CNRS (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique), all of the partners of the POLYBIO project for their financial support for the POLYBIO project from the PLASTIPOLIS and the LYONBIOPOLE clusters, including for the project’s funding, which includes Charlène Pouech’s doctoral fellowship. Additionally, we thank Hervé Casabianca for the distillation of all solvents needed for this project.

Supplementary material

216_2013_7551_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (775 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 775 kb)


  1. 1.
    Pfaendner R (2006) How will additives shape the future of plastics? Polym Degrad Stab 91:2249–2256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sanches Silva A, Sendon Garcia R, Cooper I, Franz R, Paseiro Losada P (2006) Compilation of analytical methods and guidelines for the determination of selected model migrants from plastic packaging. Trends Food Sci Technol 17:535–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ali Farajzadeh M, Goushjuii L, Ranji A, Feyz A (2007) Spectrophotometric determination of Irgafos 168 in polymers after different sample preparation procedures. Microchim Acta 159:263–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    André C, Castanheira I, Cruz JM, Paseiro P, Sanches-Silva A (2010) Analytical strategies to evaluate antioxidants in food: a review. Trends Food Sci Technol 21:229–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gill M, Garber MJ, Hua Y, Jenke D (2010) Development and validation of an HPLC-MS/MS method for quantitating bis(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-piperidyl) Sebacate (Tinuvin 770) and a related substance in aqueous extracts of plastic materials. J Chromatogr Sci 48Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Galic K, Scetar M, Kurek M (2011) The benefits of processing and packaging. Trends Food Sci Technol 22:127–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jenke D (2007) Evaluation of the chemical compatibility of plastic contact materials and pharmaceutical products, Safety considerations related to extractables and leachables. J. Pharm. Sci. 96 (10): 2566–2581Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Burman L, Albertsson AC, An H (2005) Solid-phase microextraction for qualitative and quantitative determination of migrated degradation products of antioxidants in an organic aqueous solution. J Chromatogr A 1080:107–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rosca ID, Vergnaud JM (2006) Approach for a testing system to evaluate food safety with polymer packages. Polym Test 25:532–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Farajzadeh MA, Nasserzadeh A, Ranji A (2008) A simple spectrophotometric technique for determination of Irganox 1010 in polymerix sample. Microchim Acta 161:157–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ritter A, Michel E, Schmid M, Affolter S (2005) Interlaboratory test on polymers: determination of antioxidants in polyolefins. Polym Test 24:498–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Marcato B, Guerra S, Vianello M, Scalia S (2003) Migration of antioxidant additives from various polyolefinic plastics into oleaginous vehicles. Int J Pharm 257:217–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    European Directive 2002/72/EC and amendments-FOOD CONTACT MATERIALS—Test ConditionsGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    EMEA 2005, European Medicines Agnecy Inspections, London 19 May 2005, CPMP/QWP/4359/03, EMEA/CVMP/205/04, Committee for medicinal products for human use (CHMP)-Committe for medicinal products for veterinary use (CVMP)-Guideline on plastic immediate packaging materialsGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kauffman JS (2006) Identification and Risk assessment of extractables and leachables Nondestructive analytical method, Pharmaceutical Technology, Analytical MethodsGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Salafranca J, Pezo D, Nerin C (2009) Assessment of specific migration to aqueous simulants of a new active food packaging containing essential oils by means of an automatic multiple dynamic hollow fiber liquid phase microextraction system. J Chromatogr A 1216:3731–3739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jeon DH, Park GY, Kwak IS, Lee KH, Park HJ (2007) Antioxidants and their migration into food simulants on irradiated LLDPE film. LWT 40:151–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Farajzadeh MA, Reza Vardast M, Bahram M (2009) Optimization of dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction of Irganox 1010 and Irgafos 168 from polyolefins before liquid chromatographic analysis. Chromatography 69:409–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dopico-García MS, Noguerol-Cal R, Mar Castro-López M, Concepción Cela-Pérez M, Piñón-Giz E, López-Vilariño JM, Victoria González-Rodríguez M (2012) Determination of polyolefin additives by reversed-phase liquid chromatography. Cent Eur J Chem 10(3):585–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Paseiro-Cerrato R, Rodriguez-Bernaldo de Quiros A, Sendon R, Bustos J, Santillana MI, Cruz JM, Paseiro-Losada P (2010) Chromatographic method for determination of polyfunctional amines and related compounds used as monomers and additives in food packaging materials: a state of the art review. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf 9(6):676–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Strandberg C, Albertsson AC (2008) Chromatographic analysis of antioxidants in polymeric materials and their migration from plastics into solution. Adv Polym Sci 211:117–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dopico-García MS, López-Vilariño JM, González-Rodríguez MV (2005) Determination of antioxidants by solid-phase extraction method in aqueous food stimulants. Talanta 66:1103–1107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Farajzadeh MA, Ake Jonsson J (2007) Solvent exchange using hollow fiber prior to separation and determination of some antioxidants by high performance liquid chromatography. Anal Chim Acta 594:75–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dopico-García MS, López-Vilariño JM, González-Rodríguez MV (2003) Determination of antioxidant migration levels from low-density polyethylene films into food stimulants. J Chromatogr A 1018:53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Block C, Wynants L, Kelchtermans M, De Boer R, Compernolle F (2006) Identification of polymer additives by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Polym Degrad Stab 91:3163–3173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Duderstadt RE, Fisher SM (2008) Effect of organic mobile phase composition on signal responses for selected polyalkene additive compounds by liquid-chromatography-mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A 1193:70–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Reingruber E, Himmelsbach M, Sauer C, Buchberger W (2010) Identification of degradation products of antioxidants in polyolefins by liquid chromatography combined with atmospheric pressure photoionisation mass spectrometry. Polym Degrad Stab 95(5):740–745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Himmelsbach M, Buchberger W, Reingruber E (2009) Determination of polymer additives by liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry. A comparison of atmospheric pressure photoionization (APPI), atmospheric pressure chemical ionization (APCI), and electrospray ionization (ESI). Polym Degrad Stab 94:1213–1219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Negreira N, Rodríguez I, Ramil M, Rubí E, Cela R (2009) Solid-phase extraction followed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for the determination of hydroxylated benzophenone UV absorbers in environmental water samples. Anal Chim Acta 654:162–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    European Pharmacopoeia 7.8, 7th Edition 2013 (7.8)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rambla-Alegre M, Esteve-Romero J, Carda-Broch S (2012) Is it really necessary to validate an analytical method or not? That is the question. J Chromatogr A 1232:101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH), Harmonised Tripartite Guideline Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology Q2(R1), 2005Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Taverniers I, De Loose M, Van Bockstaele E (2004) Trends in quality in the analytical laboratory. II. Analytical method validation and quality assurance. Trends Anal Chem 23 (8)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    EURACHEM/CITAC GuideCG4-Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement Second Edition. Editors: S L R Ellison (LGC, UK); M Rosslein (EMPA, Switzerland); A Williams (UK). Second edition 2000. ISBN 0 948926 15 5Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    ANALYTICAL DETECTION LIMIT GUIDANCE - & Laboratory Guide for Determining Method Detection Limits. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Laboratory Certification Program. April 1996. PUBL-TS-056-96Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Vial J, Jardy A (1999) Experimental Comparison of the Different approaches to estimate LOD and LOQ of an HPLC method. Anal Chem 71:2672–2677CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Stöckl D, D’Hondt H, Thienpont LM (2009) Method Validation across the disciples – Critical investigation of major validation criteria and associated experimental protocols. J Chromatogr B 877:2180–2190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Manisali I, Chen DDY (2006) Electrospray ionization source geometry for mass spectrometry: past, present, and future. TrAC Trends Anal Chem 25:243–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lanina SA, Toledo P, Sampels S, Kamal-Eldin A, Jastrebova JA (2007) Comparison of reversed-phase liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry with electrospray and atmospheric pressure chemical ionization for analysis of dietary tocopherols. J Chromatogr A 1157:159–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ma J, Xiao R, Li J, Yu J, Zhang Y, Chen L (2010) Determination of 16 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in environmental water samples by solid-phase extraction using multi-walled carbon nanotubes as adsorbent coupled with gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A 1217:5462–5469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Commission of the European Communities, Commission decision of August 2002. Implementing Council Directive 96/23/EC concerning the performance of analytical methods and the interpretation of results, 2002/657/EC, Official Journal oft he European Communities, 17/08/2002Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Araujo P (2009) Key aspects of analytical method validation and linearity evaluation. J Chromatogr B 877:2224–2234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gao Y, Gu Y, Wie Y (2011) Determination of polymer additives – Antioxidants and Ultraviolet (UV) absorbers by high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with UV photodiode array detection in food simulants. J Agric Food Chem 59:12982–12989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    US Food and Drug Administration (1999) Guidance for industry : Container closures systems for packaging human drugs and biologics. FDA, Rockville, pp 1–56Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Charlène Pouech
    • 1
    • 2
  • Florent Lafay
    • 1
  • Laure Wiest
    • 1
  • Robert Baudot
    • 1
  • Didier Léonard
    • 2
  • Cécile Cren-Olivé
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Université de Lyon - Institut des Sciences AnalytiquesUMR 5280 CNRS-Equipe TRACESVileurbanneFrance
  2. 2.Université de Lyon - Institut des Sciences AnalytiquesUMR 5280 CNRS - Equipe SIMSVileurbanneFrance

Personalised recommendations