Evaluation of the presence of drugs of abuse in tap waters.

AGBAR, Gral, Batet 5-7, 08028 Barcelona, Spain.
Chemosphere (Impact Factor: 3.14). 06/2011; 84(11):1601-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2011.05.033
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A total of seventy samples of drinking water were tested for non-controlled and illicit drugs. Of these, 43 were from Spanish cities, 15 from seven other European countries, three from Japan and nine from seven different Latin American countries. The most frequently detected compounds were caffeine, nicotine, cotinine, cocaine and its metabolite benzoylecgonine, methadone and its metabolite EDDP. The mean concentrations of non-controlled drugs were: for caffeine 50 and 19 ng L(-1), in Spanish and worldwide drinking water respectively and for nicotine 13 and 19 ng L(-1). Illicit drugs were sparsely present and usually at ultratrace level (<1 ng L(-1)). For example, cocaine has mean values of 0.4 (Spain) and 0.3 ng L(-1) (worldwide), whereas for benzoylecgonine, these mean values were 0.4 and 1.8 ng L(-1), respectively. Higher concentrations of benzoylecgonine were found in Latin American samples (up to 15 ng L(-1)). No opiates were identified in any sample but the presence of methadone and EDDP was frequently detected. Total mean values for EDDP were 0.4 ng L(-1) (Spain) and 0.3 ng L(-1) (worldwide). Very few samples tested positive for amphetamines, in line with the reactivity of chlorine with these compounds. No cannabinoids, LSD, ketamine, fentanyl and PCP were detected.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This work analyzes the seasonal variation (winter and summer) of ten drugs of abuse, six metabolites and three benzodiazepines in surface waters from the Jarama and Manzanares Rivers in the Madrid Region, the most densely populated area in Spain. The occurrence of these compounds in tap water in this region is also investigated and a preliminary human health risk characterization performed for those substances found in tap water. Finally, a screening level risk assessment that combines the measured environmental concentrations (MECs) with dose-response data to estimate Hazard Quotients (HQs) for the compounds studied is also presented. The results of this study show the presence of fourteen out of the nineteen compounds analyzed in winter and twelve of them in summer. The most ubiquitous compounds, with a frequency of detection of 100% in both seasons, were the cocaine metabolite benzoylecgonine (BE), the amphetamine-type stimulant (ATS) ephedrine (EPH), the opioid methadone (METH), the METH metabolite 2-ethylene-1,5-dimethyl-3,3-diphenylpyrrolidine (EDDP), and the three benzodiazepines investigated, namely alprazolam (ALP), diazepam (DIA) and lorazepam (LOR). The highest concentrations observed corresponded to EPH (1020ngL(-1) in winter and 250ngL(-1) in summer). The only compounds not detected in both seasons were heroin (HER) and its metabolite 6-acetylmorphine (6ACM), lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) and its metabolite 2-oxo-3-hydroxy-LSD (O-H-LSD), and Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). In terms of overall concentration, all sampling points presented higher concentrations in winter than in summer. Statistical analyses performed to gather evidence concerning occasional seasonal differences in the concentrations of individual substances between summer and winter showed statistically significantly higher concentrations (p<0.05) of BE, EPH and the opioid morphine (MOR) in winter than in summer. Two out of the nineteen compounds studied, namely cocaine (CO) and EPH, were detected in tap water from one sampling point at concentrations of 1.61 and 0.29ngL(-1), respectively. The preliminary human health risk characterization showed that no toxic effects could be expected at the detected concentration level in tap water. The screening level risk assessment showed that MOR, EDDP and the THC metabolite 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC-COOH) were present in at least one of the sampling sites in a concentration leading to a Hazard Quotient (HQ) value between 1.0 and 10.0, thus indicating some possible adverse effects. The cumulative HQ or Toxic units (TUs) calculated for each of the groups studied showed that opioids and cannabinoids were present at concentrations high enough to potentially generate some adverse effects on at least one sampling point.
    Environment International 06/2014; 70C:76-87. · 6.25 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rapid and sensitive analytical methodology based on ultra high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry has been developed for the determination of widely consumed drugs of abuse (amphetamines, MDMA, cocaine, opioids, cannabis and ketamine) and their major metabolites in urban wastewaters. Sample clean-up and pre-concentration was performed by a generic off-line SPE procedure using Oasis HLB. Special effort was made to incorporate amphetamine, which was found highly problematic in the wastewater samples tested, including an additional clean-up with Oasis MCX SPE and dispersive primary secondary amine. Correction for possible SPE losses or degradation during storage was made by the use of isotope-labelled internal standards (ILIS), available for all compounds, which were added to the samples as surrogates. Although ILIS were also efficient for matrix effects correction, the strong ionization suppression observed was not eliminated; therefore, a four-fold dilution prior to SPE was applied to influent wastewaters and a low injection volume was selected (3 μL), in order to reach a compromise between matrix effects, chromatographic performance and sensitivity. The method was validated at 25 and 200 ng L(-1) (effluent), and 100 and 800 ng L(-1) (influent), obtaining limits of quantification (i.e. the lowest level that the compound can be quantified and also confirmed with at least two MS/MS transitions) between 0.4-25 ng L(-1) (effluent) and 2-100 ng L(-1) (influent). The applicability of the method was demonstrated by analysis of 14 influent and 14 effluent wastewater samples collected over 2 weeks in Castellón (Spain) within a European collaborative study.
    Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 04/2014; · 3.66 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The effect of nicotine from littered cigarette butts on the quality of urban water resources has yet to be investigated. This two-part study addresses the spatial variation, seasonal dynamics and average residence time of littered cigarette butts in public space, as well as the release of nicotine from cigarette butts to run-off in urban areas during its residence time. Thereby, we tested two typical situations: release to standing water in a puddle and release during alternating rainfall and drying. The study took place in Berlin, Germany, a city which completely relies on its own water resources to meet its drinking water demand. Nine typical sites located in a central district, each divided into 20 plots were studied during five sampling periods between May 2012 and February 2013. The nicotine release from standardized cigarette butts prepared with a smoking machine was examined in batch and rainfall experiments. Littered cigarette butts are unevenly distributed among both sites and plots. The average butt concentration was 2.7 m−2 (SD = 0.6 m−2, N = 862); the maximum plot concentration was 48.8 butts m−2. This heterogeneity is caused by preferential littering (gastronomy, entrances, bus stops), redistribution processes such as litter removal (gastronomy, shop owners), and the increased accumulation in plots protected from mechanized street sweeping (tree pits, bicycle stands). No significant seasonal variation of cigarette butt accumulation was observed. On average, cigarette butt accumulation is characterized by a 6 days cadence due to the rhythm and effectiveness of street sweeping (mean weekly butt accumulation rate = 0.18 m−2 d−1; SD = 0.15 m−1). Once the butt is exposed to standing water, elution of nicotine occurs rapidly. Standardized butts released 7.3 mg g−1 nicotine in a batch experiment (equivalent to 2.5 mg L−1), 50% of which occurred within the first 27 min. In the rainfall experiment, the cumulative nicotine release from fifteen consecutive precipitation events (each 1.4 mm) was 3.8 mg g−1, with 47% during the first event. According to these results, one cigarette butt may contaminate an amount of 1000 L water to concentrations above the predicted no effect concentration (PNEC) of only 2.4 × 10−3 mg L−1 (Valcárcel et al., 2011). Given the continuous littering of cigarette butts, and the rapid release of nicotine, cigarette butts are assessed to be a relevant threat to the quality of urban waters and consequently to drinking water.
    Journal of Hydrology 05/2014; · 2.96 Impact Factor