Perspective - (2022) Volume 11, Issue 4
Received: Nov 30, 2022, Manuscript No. IJBPR-22-83584; Editor assigned: Dec 02, 2022, Pre QC No. IJBPR-22-83584(PQ); Reviewed: Dec 16, 2022, QC No. IJBPR-22-83584; Revised: Dec 23, 2022, Manuscript No. IJBPR-22-83584(R); Published: Dec 30, 2022, DOI: 10.35248/2287-68184.108.40.20642-2743
Pharmaceuticals have sparked major worries about emerging pollutants due to their prevalence and potential harm to both human and environment health. The quantities of pharmaceuticals in surface water have undergone substantial research using a variety of methodologies since it serves as the primary sink for medications. The amounts of pharmaceuticals found in surface water ranged from ng L1 to g L1 due to the inadequate removal efficiency in Wastewater Treatment Facilities (WWTPs). To completely comprehend the impacts of pharmaceutical exposure, it is crucial to measure the precise quantities of medicines in riverine habitats. The accessibility of useful instruments is crucial for monitoring chemical contaminants. The most common sample technique for determining the concentration of micro pollutants in surface water is conventional grab sampling.
Low-frequency grab sampling, however, is unable to identify varying concentrations over lengthy event durations. High-resolution grab sampling also adds to the expense and labour of contamination monitoring. Passive sampling techniques have been suggested as alternatives because they have better detection limits and less measurement uncertainty, which is advantageous given that target pollutants are preconcentrated during deployment. The three most popular passive samplers for monitoring polar organic pollutants are Diffusive Gradients in Thin Films (DGT), Polar Organic Chemical Integrative Sampling (POCIS), and Chemcatcher. Due to the use of a single sampling rate, using POCIS with Chemcatcher causes significant variances in the calculation of Time- Weight Average (TWA) concentration.
Contrary to POCIS and Chemcatcher, the uptake of contaminants by DGT is not reliant on the hydrodynamic environment, necessitating no additional calibration for in-situ monitoring. DGT can therefore be used to provide quantitative in situ measurements of calimicro pollutants in environmental waters. Pesticides, medications, personal care items, synthetic musks, perfluoroalkyl substances, hormone-disrupting chemicals, illegal drugs, organophosphate esters, brominated flame retardants, Bisphenols, bitter agents and melamine are just a few of the organic pollutants that have been measured using DGT. Despite the fact that these ground breaking studies expanded the use of DGT to monitor organic compounds, the number of model pollutants has remained small. Therefore, it is crucial to comprehend any restrictions that apply to contaminants with varied chemical properties in the context of DGT application. Additionally, more research is still required to determine the ideal DGT configuration and the variables that affect sampling performance. Previous research showed that several medicines in wastewater developed DGT. The effectiveness of DGT for pharmaceutical monitoring in surface waters is, however, not well understood.
Antiviral medicine use dramatically rose during the COVID-19 pandemic, causing considerable threats to the aquatic ecology due to the severe ecological dangers posed by ritonavir and lopinavir. Arbidol buildup in river bottom sediments, which may act as a secondary pollutant source. The effects of the drugs used to treat COVID-19 on the aquatic environment are a growing concern and require more research. The creation of a DGT passive sampling device for tracking antiviral medications used to treat COVID-19 is thus necessary for the quantitative evaluation of ecological threats brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. To develop DGT devices, we thoroughly examined the uptake kinetics and binding power of various binding resins, calculated the diffusion coefficients in diffusive gels, and examined the ability for target drugs to bind to membrane filters. So, it was determined how pH, Ionic Strength (IS), and flow velocity affected DGT sampling. Finally, the field performance of the designed DGT devices was assessed in comparison to results from grab sampling.
Based on a comparison with XAD18 and XDA1 binding resins, the developed the HLB-DGT sampling devices for monitoring 35 medicines, including three antiviral medications used to treat COVID-19. For a variety of pH, IS, and flow velocity ranges, HLB-DGT performed well. The stability and dependability of HLB-DGT were confirmed by field applications since they were comparable to the TWA concentrations discovered by grab sampling. The HLB-DGT devices can therefore be used to monitor drugs instead of low-frequency grab sampling. The HLB-DGT devices’ trustworthy data on water quality monitoring can aid in understanding the overall effects of the presence and fate of pharmaceuticals in environmental waters. Additional research should be done to apply DGT to additional organic pollutants that need priority control. New DGT device designs should be created for surface water monitoring fields in order to address the issue of low sample rates rather than to make up for it by lengthening sampling times.