Jump to main content
US EPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Search
Search
Main menu
Environmental Topics
Laws & Regulations
About EPA
Health & Environmental Research Online (HERO)
Contact Us
Print
Feedback
Export to File
Search:
This record has one attached file:
Add More Files
Attach File(s):
Display Name for File*:
Save
Citation
Tags
HERO ID
3981401
Reference Type
Journal Article
Subtype
Review
Title
Gas chromatographic determination of perfluorocarboxylic acids in aqueous samples - A tutorial review
Author(s)
Shafique, U; Schulze, S; Slawik, C; Kunz, S; Paschke, A; Schüürmann, G
Year
2017
Is Peer Reviewed?
Yes
Journal
Analytica Chimica Acta
ISSN:
0003-2670
EISSN:
1873-4324
Publisher
Elsevier B.V.
Volume
949
Page Numbers
8-22
Language
English
PMID
27876149
DOI
10.1016/j.aca.2016.10.026
Web of Science Id
WOS:000388109800002
Abstract
Determination of perfluorocarboxylic acids (PFCAs) by gas chromatography (GC) has been undertaken since 1980. However, only small number of studies can be found in the literature due to the major drawbacks associated with the GC determination of PFCAs such as high detection limits, a small range of analytes, long analysis time, and laborious derivatization prior to chromatographic separation. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS(2)) can overcome these limitations of GC, and therefore has become the method of choice for the determination of PFCAs since 2001. Nevertheless, GC as a low-cost and commonly available analytical technique should not be ignored because of its inherent advantage over LC to identify PFCA isomers in environmental and biological matrices owing to its high-resolution power. In addition, GC provides an opportunity to crosscheck LC-MS(2) results that are often suspicious due to background contamination. This tutorial provides an overview of GC methods that have been used for the determination of PFCAs after derivatization. Moreover, performance characteristics of GC-MS are compared with that of LC-MS(2). PFCAs in aqueous samples were determined by both analytical techniques, and two sets of measurements were compared using the Bland-Altman plot. For both methods, reasons for false-positive and false-negative results (overestimation and underestimation of the PFCA concentration, respectively) are discussed, and accordingly some advice is offered on how to avoid erroneous results. Finally, major applications of GC and its future perspectives for the determination of PFCAs are discussed.
Keywords
Bland-Altman plot; Effluent; Gas chromatography; Liquid chromatography; Perfluorocarboxylic acids; PFOA; Solid-phase extraction
Tags
PFAS
•
Additional PFAS (formerly XAgency)
•
^Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)
PFOA (335-67-1) and PFOS (1763-23-1)
Literature Search – Adverse outcome pathway (2015-present)
Pubmed
WOS
•
PFDA
Scopus: April 2021
•
PFNA
Litsearch Update 2017-2018
Exclusions
Reviews
Litsearch Addl Synonyms 2018
Exclusions
Reviews
Literature Search
Exclusions
Reviews
Toxline
PFNA May 2019 Update
Toxnet
•
PFOA (335-67-1) and PFOS (1763-23-1)
Literature Search – Adverse outcome pathway (2015-present)
Pubmed
WOS
Screening Results
Excluded/Not on Topic
Literature Search Update (2013-2019)
PubMed
WOS
Home
Learn about HERO
Using HERO
Search HERO
Projects in HERO
Risk Assessment
Transparency & Integrity