Table 4.

DCF, E2, and EE2 concentrations in influent and effluents and the removal efficiency by conventional wastewater treatment in Europe since 2002. During secondary treatment, diclofenac had moderate removal rates in different WWTPs in Europe. The removal rates are different, depending on various influences

Compound/WWTP/country	Concentration (μg L−1)		Removal efficiency (%)	Reference
	Influent	Effluent
DCF
Not described, Germany	3.02a	2.51a	17	Heberer (2002b)
Conventional WWTP, France, Greece, Italy	–	0.68a	–	Andreozzi et al. (2003)
Conventional WWTP, UK	–	0.41–0.46	–	Hilton and Thomas (2004)
4 conventional WWTPs, UK	–	0.599b (0.424a)	–	Ashton et al. (2004)
Conventional WWTP, Germany	2.3b	1.6b	30	Quintana and Reemtsma (2004)
3 conventional WWTPs (1–3) with preliminary clarification	WWTP1 (3 samplings): 3.19–4.11	WWTP1 (3 samplings): 1.53–1.68	WWTP1 (3 samplings): 47–62	Clara et al. (2005)
2 aeration tanks, final clarification, Austria	WWTP2: 1.40	WWTP2: 1.30	WWTP2: 7
	WWTP3: 0.90	WWTP3: 0.78	WWTP3: 14
Conventional WWTP, Sweden	0.16	0.12	25	Bendz et al. (2005)
Pilot-scale membrane bioreactor (in 3 sampling periods	3.19–4.11c	2.03–3.46c	−6.6d to 50.6	Clara et al. (2005)
Conventional WWTP, pilot-scale membrane or fixed bed reactor, Switzerland	–	–	20–40	Joss et al. (2005)
3 conventional WWTPs in EU with secondary or tertiary treatments	–	–	<5	Reemtsma et al.(2006)
Different conventional WWTP, Spain, Belgium, Germany, and Slovenia	0.021–0.148c	0.032–1.42c	–	Hernando et al. (2006)
5 conventional WWTPs, Croatia	250a	215a	14	Gros et al. (2006b)
	–	0.21–0.49c	–	Rabiet et al. (2006)
Conventional WWTP, Finland	0.42a (0.46a)	0.32b (0.35a)	24	Vieno (2007)
Conventional WWTP, Norway	295a	259a	13	Thomas et al. (2007)
Hospital Ulleval, Norway	784a			Thomas et al. (2007)
Hospital Rijkshospitalet, Norway	1550a			Thomas et al. (2007)
29 WWTPs, municipal and industrial in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia	0.859b			Terzić et al. (2008)
Conventional WWTP, Sweden, municipal and hospital wastewater	0.23b	0.49b	−105	Zorita et al. (2009)
WWTP Cilfynydd, Wales, UK: biological treatment-trickling filter beds	0.07	0.12	−71d	Kasprzyk-Hordern et al. (2008)
7 conventional WWTPs, Spain			30–100	Gros et al. (2007)
Conventional WWTP, Greece	0.86–2.17c	0.15–1.1c 0.41b	–	Samaras et al. (2013)
Conventional WWTP, Spain with influent of wastewater from 4 hospitals and municipal wastewater	0.0670b	0.043	38	Santos et al. (2013)
Conventional WWTP, Switzerland	1.197b	1.187b	9	Margot et al. (2013)
8 conventional WWTPs, Greece	0.28b	0.11b	70	Kosma et al. (2014)
Conventional WWTP, Spain, industrial/municipal wastewater	0.288	0.309	<1	Collado et al. (2014)
Conventional WWTP, France (a) total nitrification + post denitrification; (b) partial nitrification, no denitrification	(a) 184b (b) 384b	(a) 52b (b) 171b	(a) 72b (b) 55b	Mailler et al. (2014)
		0.049b/0.043a		Loos et al. (2013)
E2
Conventional WWTP, Norway	12a	<3a	75	Thomas et al. (2007)
Hospital Ulleval, Norway	28a			Thomas et al. (2007)
Hospital Rijkshospitalet, Norway	41a			Thomas et al. (2007)
Conventional WWTP, Europe	25.7b 21.5a	1.9b 1.0a		Janex-Habibi et al. (2009)
EE2
Conventional WWTP, Norway	<0.3a	<0.3a		Thomas et al. (2007)
Hospital Ulleval, Norway	<0.3a			Thomas et al. (2007)
Hospital Rijkshospitalet, Norway	<0.3a			Thomas et al. (2007)
Conventional WWTP, France	1.6b 1.0a	0.9b 0.5a		Janex-Habibi et al. (2009)

^aMedian

^bMean

^cMin–max

^dIncrease of the effluent concentration relative to the influent concentration