Recovery and Economic Aspects of Extraction Methods for Artemisinin and its Precursors from <i>Artemisia annua</i> L. Leaves

A bibliometric analysis of <i>Artemisia annua</i> L. research revealed substantial variability in extraction methods and solvents, underscoring the absence of standardized protocols. This methodological inconsistency can lead to differences in extract composition, reducing the reproducibility and comparability of research outcomes. The present study evaluated the recovery and economic aspects of extraction methods and solvents for artemisinin (ART), dihydroartemisinic acid (DHAA), and artemisinic acid (AA) from <i>A. annua</i> L. leaves. The extraction methods assessed were  Refluxer (R), Ultra-Turrax Disperser (D), Shaker (S), and Ultrasound Bath (U) use three solvents: petroleum ether (PE), acetonitrile (ACN), and 70% ethanol (ET). Target compounds were quantified by high-performance liquid chromatography with diode-array detection (HPLC-DAD). ACN was the most efficient in extracting all three compounds, making it the most suitable for analytical and precision-oriented applications. However, ET was identified as a safer, renewable and cost-effective alternative, particularly for ART extraction, and can also enable the coextraction of antioxidant flavonoids with potential pharmaceutical relevance. Among the methods tested, the D technique offered the best balance for laboratory-scale use, combining fast extraction with low solvent consumption and minimal equipment cost.