Comparison of the Conventional and Electroenhanced Direct-Immersion Solid-Phase Microextraction for Sampling of Nicotine in Biological Fluids of the Human Body

• Published in: Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) Vol. 23; no. 5; p. 1171
• Main Authors: Abdolhosseini, Sana, Ghiasvand, Ali Reza, Heidari, Nahid
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland MDPI AG 14.05.2018; MDPI
• Subjects: Blood plasma; Body fluids; Calibration; Coated fibers; Direct current; Electrophoretic deposition; Extraction processes; Flame ionization; Flame ionization detectors; Functional groups; Gas chromatography; Immersion; Ionic strength; Ionization; Ionization counters; Nicotine; Quantitation; Sampling; Scanning electron microscopy; Solid phase methods; Stainless steel; Surface structure; Urine; nicotine; plasma; urine; electroenhanced SPME; direct-immersion SPME
• ISSN: 1420-3049; 1420-3049
• DOI: 10.3390/molecules23051171

A stainless steel fiber was made porous and adhesive by platinization and then coated by nanostructured polypyrrole (PPy), using an appropriate electrophoretic deposition (EPD) method. The morphological surface structure and functional groups of the PPy-coated fiber were studied using SEM (Scanning electron microscope) instrument. The prepared fiber was used for comparison of direct immersion (DI) and electroenhanced direct immersion solid-phase microextraction (EE-DI-SPME) of nicotine in human plasma and urine samples followed by gas chromatography flame ionization detector (GC-FID) determination. The effects of the influential experimental parameters on the efficiency of the DI-SPME and EE-DI-SPME methods, including the pH and ionic strength of the sample solution, applied Direct current (DC) voltage, extraction temperature and time and stirring rate, were optimized. Under the optimal conditions, the calibration curves for the DI-SPME-GC-FID and EE-DI-SPME-GC-FID methods were linear over the ranges of 0.1⁻10.0 μg mL and 0.001⁻10.0 μg mL , respectively. The relative standard deviations (RSDs, = 6) were found to be 6.1% and 4.6% for the DI and EE strategies, respectively. The LODs (limit of detection) of the DI-SPME-GC-FID and EE-DI-SPME-GC-FID methods were found to be 10 and 0.3 ng mL , respectively. The relative recovery values (for the analysis of 1 µg mL nicotine) were found to be 91⁻110% for EE-DI-SPME and 75⁻105% for DI-SPME. The enrichment factors for DI-SPME and EE-DI-SPME sampling were obtained as 38,734 and 50,597, respectively. The results indicated that EE-SPME was more efficient for quantitation of nicotine in biological fluids. The developed procedure was successfully carried out for the extraction and measurement of nicotine in real plasma and urine samples.