Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Effect of Puffing Behavior on Particle Size Distributions and Respiratory Depositions From Pod-Style Electronic Cigarette, or Vaping, Products.
Ranpara, Anand; Stefaniak, Aleksandr B; Fernandez, Elizabeth; LeBouf, Ryan F.
  • Ranpara A; Respiratory Health Division, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, WV, United States.
  • Stefaniak AB; Respiratory Health Division, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, WV, United States.
  • Fernandez E; Respiratory Health Division, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, WV, United States.
  • LeBouf RF; Respiratory Health Division, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, WV, United States.
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)
Keywords

Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems / Vaping Type of study: Experimental Studies / Prognostic study Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Front Public Health Year: 2021 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Fpubh.2021.750402

Similar

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Full text: Available Collection: International databases Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems / Vaping Type of study: Experimental Studies / Prognostic study Limits: Humans Language: English Journal: Front Public Health Year: 2021 Document Type: Article Affiliation country: Fpubh.2021.750402