Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

, Volume 409, Issue 8, pp 1975–1984 | Cite as

Automated thin-film microextraction coupled to a flow-through cell: somewhere in between passive and active sampling

  • Manuel Wohde
  • Jens-Ole Bartz
  • Leonard Böhm
  • Christoph Hartwig
  • Benjamin Martin Keil
  • Katharina Martin
  • Rolf-Alexander Düring
Research Paper


A prototype for the automated thin-film microextraction of pharmaceuticals from aqueous solutions has been developed and is presented here for the first time. With a software-controlled setup, extraction methods for ivermectin and iohexol have been developed. The widely used antiparasitic agent ivermectin is non-polar and has a high tendency to sorb to surfaces. In contrast to this, the nonionic but polar iodinated X-ray contrast agent iohexol is freely water soluble. With these two substances, a wide range of polarity is covered. Sorption kinetics and thermodynamics of ivermectin and iohexol were studied. With the presented passive sampling approach, it was possible to extract up to 96.2% ivermectin with a C18-phase within 1 h and up to 74.6% of iohexol with a PS-DVB phase within 36 h out of water. Using abamectin as internal standard, it was possible to quantitatively follow dissipation of ivermectin in a simulated surface water experiment. Predominantly, the newly developed prototype can be used for automated and time-resolved extraction of xenobiotics from waterbodies under field conditions, for the extraction of substances under laboratory conditions as an alternative to the elaborate solid-phase extraction, and for the automated control of chemical reaction kinetics.


TFME Passive sampling Ivermectin Iohexol Pharmaceuticals Xenobiotics 



The present study was financially supported by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi; grant number KF2815902RH1) and the BANSS Foundation. The flow-through system was constructed together with the participants of the electronic- and the precision mechanics-workshop of the physics faculty of the Justus Liebig University Giessen. PAS Technology Deutschland GmbH (Magdala, Germany) kindly provided the coated combs in cooperation with the working group of Janusz Pawliszyn (University of Waterloo, Canada).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

216_2016_145_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (396 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 396 kb)


  1. 1.
    Fernandez-Amado M, Prieto-Blanco MC, Lopez-Mahia P, Muniategui-Lorenzo S, Prada-Rodriguez D. Strengths and weaknesses of in-tube solid-phase microextraction: a scoping review. Anal Chim Acta. 2016;906:41–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vuckovic D. High-throughput solid-phase microextraction in multi-well-plate format. Trac-Trend Anal Chem. 2013;45:136–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Duan C, Shen Z, Wu D, Guan Y. Recent developments in solid-phase microextraction for on-site sampling and sample preparation. Trac-Trend Anal Chem. 2011;30(10):1568–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Piri-Moghadam H, Ahmadi F, Pawliszyn J. A critical review of solid phase microextraction for analysis of water samples. Trac-Trend Anal Chem. 2016. doi: 10.1016/j.trac.2016.05.029.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Strittmatter N, Düring R-A, Takáts Z. Analysis of wastewater samples by direct combination of thin-film microextraction and desorption electrospray ionization mass spectrometry. Analyst. 2012;137(17):4037–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fatta-Kassinos D, Meric S, Nikolaou A. Pharmaceutical residues in environmental waters and wastewater: current state of knowledge and future research. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2011;399:251–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gros M, Petrovic M, Barcelo D. Multi-residue analytical methods using LC-tandem MS for the determination of pharmaceuticals in environmental and wastewater samples: a review. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2006;386(4):941–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kummerer K. Pharmaceuticals in the environment. Annu Rev Environ Resour. 2010;35:57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nikolaou A, Meric S, Fatta D. Occurrence patterns of pharmaceuticals in water and wastewater environments. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2007;387(4):1225–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kemper N. Veterinary antibiotics in the aquatic and terrestrial environment. Ecol Indic. 2008;8(1):1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Crump A, Omura S. Ivermectin, ‘Wonder drug’ from Japan. Proc Jpn Acad B-Phys. 2011;87(2):13–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Omura S. Ivermectin: 25 years and still going strong. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2008;31(2):91–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Callaway E, Cyranoski D. Anti-parasite drugs sweep Nobel prize in medicine 2015. Nature. 2015;526(7572):174–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wall R, Strong L. Environmental consequences of treating cattle with the antiparasitic drug ivermectin. Nature. 1987;327(6121):418–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Liebig M, Fernandez ÁA, Blübaum-Gronau E, Boxall A, Brinke M, Carbonell G, et al. Environmental risk assessment of ivermectin: a case study. Integr Environ Assess Manag. 2011;6(S1):567–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Domingues I, Oliveira R, Soares AMVM, Amorim MJB. Effects of ivermectin on Danio rerio: a multiple endpoint approach: behaviour, weight and subcellular markers. Ecotoxicology. 2016;25(3):491–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Floate KD, Düring R-A, Hanafi J, Jud P, Lahr J, Lumaret J-P, et al. Validation of a standard field test method in four countries to assess the toxicity of residues in dung of cattle treated with veterinary medical products. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2016. doi: 10.1002/etc.3154.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    US Food and Drug Administration. Ivomec (ivermectin) pour-on for cattle. Environmental assessment. NADA 140–841. 1990. Accessed 15 Jun 2016.
  19. 19.
    Krogh KA, Jensen GG, Schneider MK, Fenner K, Halling-Sørensen B. Analysis of the dissipation kinetics of ivermectin at different temperatures and in four different soils. Chemosphere. 2009;75:1097–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Abcam. Product datasheet, iohexol ab143646. 2016. Accessed 15 Jun 2016.
  21. 21.
    Jäger R. Quantification and localization of molecular hydrophobicity. Dissertation, TU Darmstadt, Germany. 2000.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Haria M, Brogden RN. Iohexol—a review of its pharmacological properties and use as a contrast medium in myelography and neuroangiography. CNS Drugs. 1997;7(3):229–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Perez S, Barcelo D. Fate and occurrence of X-ray contrast media in the environment. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2006;386(4):941–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Steger-Hartmann T, Lange R, Schweinfurth H. Environmental risk assessment for the widely used iodinated X-ray contrast agent iopromide (ultravist). Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 1999;42(3):274–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Carballa M, Omil F, Ternes T, Lema JM. Fate of pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCPs) during anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge. Water Res. 2007;41(10):2139–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kormos JL, Schulz M, Kohler H-PE, Ternes TA. Biotransformation of selected iodinated X-ray contrast media and characterization of microbial transformation pathways. Environ Sci Technol. 2010;44(13):4998–5007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mirnaghi FS, Chen Y, Sidisky LM, Pawliszyn J. Optimization of the coating procedure for a high-throughput 96-blade solid phase microextraction system coupled with LC-MS/MS for analysis of complex samples. Anal Chem. 2011;83:6018–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wohde M, Blanckenhorn WU, Floate KD, Lahr J, Lumaret JP, Römbke J, et al. Analysis and dissipation of the antiparasitic agent ivermectin in cattle dung under different field conditions. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2016. doi: 10.1002/etc.3462.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ho Y-S. Citation review of Lagergren kinetic rate equation on adsorption reactions. Scientometrics. 2004;59:171–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lagergren S. About the theory of so-called adsorption of soluble substances. Kungliga Svenska Vetenskapsakademiens. Handlingar. 1898;24(4):1–39.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Prasse C, Löffler D, Ternes TA. Environmental fate of the anthelmintic ivermectin in an aerobic sediment/water system. Chemosphere. 2009;77(10):1321–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    International Organization for Standardization. Capability of detection - part 1: terms and definitions. ISO 11843–1. 1997. Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manuel Wohde
    • 1
  • Jens-Ole Bartz
    • 2
  • Leonard Böhm
    • 1
  • Christoph Hartwig
    • 1
  • Benjamin Martin Keil
    • 1
  • Katharina Martin
    • 1
  • Rolf-Alexander Düring
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Soil Science and Soil ConservationJustus Liebig University Giessen, IFZGiessenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Applied MicrobiologyJustus Liebig University GiessenGiessenGermany

Personalised recommendations