Table 3.
Comparison between the developed SPE-IMs method with similar reported ones in the bibliography
| Method | Material/device | Sample matrix | Sample volume required (μL) | Pretreatment time (min) | Recoveries (%) | RSD (%) | LODs (μg L−1) | E.F.1 | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| μ-SPE-SERS | C18 bed/pipette tip | Oral fluid | 400 | 4 | 64 | - | 31 | 1.8 | [36] |
| μ-SPE-LC-MS/MS | MIP/polypropylene membrane | Urine | 1000 | 26 | 83–100 | ≤ 10 | 0.04–0.7 | 20 | [37] |
| Online SPE-LC-MS/MS | Agilent PLRP-s/SPE cartridge | Oral fluid | - | 15 | 33–167 | ≤ 20 | 0.4–3.8 | - | [38] |
| SPE-LC-MS | Oasis ® HLB/6 mL SPE cartridge | Wastewater | 20 | 1 | 79–136 | ≤ 15 | 0.0005–0.1 | 200 | [39] |
| μ-SPE-IMS | MOF@paper/1 cm2 square | Oral fluid | 100 | 240 | 50–116 | ≤ 12 | 15–30 | 33 | This work |
*Abbreviations: μ-SPE, micro solid-phase extraction; SERS, surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy; MS, mass spectrometry; IMS, ion mobility spectrometry; MIP, molecularly imprinted polymer; HLB, hydrophilic-lipophilic balance
1Enrichment factor has been calculated taking into account the used volumes (3 μL of IMS injection volume in our case)