Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters

Database
Language
Document Type
Year range
1.
Front Public Health ; 9: 750402, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1775933

ABSTRACT

The current fourth generation ("pod-style") electronic cigarette, or vaping, products (EVPs) heat a liquid ("e-liquid") contained in a reservoir ("pod") using a battery-powered coil to deliver aerosol into the lungs. A portion of inhaled EVP aerosol is estimated as exhaled, which can present a potential secondhand exposure risk to bystanders. The effects of modifiable factors using either a prefilled disposable or refillable pod-style EVPs on aerosol particle size distribution (PSD) and its respiratory deposition are poorly understood. In this study, the influence of up to six puff profiles (55-, 65-, and 75-ml puff volumes per 6.5 and 7.5 W EVP power settings) on PSD was evaluated using a popular pod-style EVP (JUUL® brand) and a cascade impactor. JUUL® brand EVPs were used to aerosolize the manufacturers' e-liquids in their disposable pods and laboratory prepared "reference e-liquid" (without flavorings or nicotine) in refillable pods. The modeled dosimetry and calculated aerosol mass median aerodynamic diameters (MMADs) were used to estimate regional respiratory deposition. From these results, exhaled fraction of EVP aerosols was calculated as a surrogate of the secondhand exposure potential. Overall, MMADs did not differ among puff profiles, except for 55- and 75-ml volumes at 7.5 W (p < 0.05). For the reference e-liquid, MMADs ranged from 1.02 to 1.23 µm and dosimetry calculations predicted that particles would deposit in the head region (36-41%), in the trachea-bronchial (TB) region (19-21%), and in the pulmonary region (40-43%). For commercial JUUL® e-liquids, MMADs ranged from 0.92 to 1.67 µm and modeling predicted that more particles would deposit in the head region (35-52%) and in the pulmonary region (30-42%). Overall, 30-40% of the particles aerosolized by a pod-style EVP were estimated to deposit in the pulmonary region and 50-70% of the inhaled EVP aerosols could be exhaled; the latter could present an inhalational hazard to bystanders in indoor occupational settings. More research is needed to understand the influence of other modifiable factors on PSD and exposure potential.


Subject(s)
Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems , Vaping , Humans , Nicotine , Particle Size
2.
Front Public Health ; 9: 744166, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1775908

ABSTRACT

Electronic cigarette, or vaping, products (EVP) heat liquids ("e-liquids") that contain substances (licit or illicit) and deliver aerosolized particles into the lungs. Commercially available oils such as Vitamin-E-acetate (VEA), Vitamin E oil, coconut, and medium chain triglycerides (MCT) were often the constituents of e-liquids associated with an e-cigarette, or vaping, product use-associated lung injury (EVALI). The objective of this study was to evaluate the mass-based physical characteristics of the aerosolized e-liquids prepared using these oil diluents. These characteristics were particle size distributions for modeling regional respiratory deposition and puff-based total aerosol mass for estimating the number of particles delivered to the respiratory tract. Four types of e-liquids were prepared by adding terpenes to oil diluents individually: VEA, Vitamin E oil, coconut oil, and MCT. A smoking machine was used to aerosolize each e-liquid at a predetermined puff topography (volume of 55 ml for 3 s with 30-s intervals between puffs). A cascade impactor was used to collect the size-segregated aerosol for calculating the mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) and geometric standard deviation (GSD). The respiratory deposition of EVP aerosols on inhalation was estimated using the Multiple-Path Particle Dosimetry model. From these results, the exhaled fraction of EVP aerosols was calculated as a surrogate of secondhand exposure potential. The MMAD of VEA (0.61 µm) was statistically different compared to MCT (0.38 µm) and coconut oil (0.47 µm) but not to Vitamin E oil (0.58 µm); p < 0.05. Wider aerosol size distribution was observed for VEA (GSD 2.35) and MCT (GSD 2.08) compared with coconut oil (GSD 1.53) and Vitamin E oil (GSD 1.55). Irrespective of the statistical differences between MMADs, dosimetry modeling resulted in the similar regional and lobular deposition of particles for all e-liquids in the respiratory tract. The highest (~0.08 or more) fractional deposition was predicted in the pulmonary region, which is consistent as the site of injury among EVALI cases. Secondhand exposure calculations indicated that a substantial amount of EVP aerosols could be exhaled, which has potential implications for bystanders. The number of EVALI cases has declined with the removal of VEA; however, further research is required to investigate the commonly available commercial ingredients used in e-liquid preparations.


Subject(s)
Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems , Dronabinol , Humans , Lung , Oils
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL