Search

Background: Passive exposure to the aerosols of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) has been little studied. We assessed this exposure in late pregnancy in a woman and her 3-year-old child, exposed through e-cigarette use by another household member., Methods: This prospective longitudinal case study involved a family unit consisting of an e-cigarette user, a pregnant woman who delivered an infant during the study, and the couple's older 3-year-old son. At 31, 36, and 40 weeks of the pregnancy, we measured biomarkers (nicotine metabolites, tobacco-specific nitrosamines, propanediols, glycerol, and metals) in the urine and hair of all three participants and in the saliva of the adults, in cord blood at delivery, and in the breast milk at the postpartum period., Results: Samples from the e-cigarette user showed quantifiable concentrations of all analytes assessed (maximum urinary cotinine concentration, 4.9 ng/mL). Among samples taken from the mother, nicotine and its metabolites were found mainly in urine and also in saliva and hair, but not in cord blood. During the postpartum period, we found cotinine concentrations of 2.2 ng/mL in the mother's urine and 0.22 ng/mL in breast milk; 1,2-propanediol was generally detected in urine and saliva, but not in cord blood or breast milk. The maximum urinary cotinine concentration in the 3-year-old child was 2.6 ng/mL and propanediols also were detected in his urine. Nitrosamines were not detected in samples taken from the mother or the 3-year-old. Metals found in the refill liquid were detected at low levels in both the mother and the 3-year-old., Conclusions: We detected low but not negligible concentrations of e-cigarette-related analytes (including cord blood and breast milk) in an exposed pregnant non-user and in a 3-year-old child also living in the home. Passive exposure to e-cigarette aerosols cannot be disregarded and should be assessed in larger observational studies., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The members of the family in this study were the primary investigator (Montse Ballbè, the mother), one of the co-authors (Guillem Masana, the e-cigarette user), and their older son (the 3-year-old child). MB and GM have no conflict of interests regarding the results or their implications. Both MB and GM strictly followed the study protocol and were not involved in any of the analytical procedures. MB and GM objectively discussed all the results with the rest of investigators. All the authors declare no conflicts of interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use emits potentially hazardous compounds and deteriorates indoor air quality. Home is a place where e-cigarettes may frequently be used amid its increasing prohibition in public places. This study assessed the real-life scenario of bystanders' exposure to secondhand e-cigarette aerosol (SHA) at home. A one-week observational study was conducted within the TackSHS project in four countries (Greece, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom) in 2019 including: 1) homes of e-cigarette users living together with a non-user/non-smoker; and 2) control homes with no smokers nor e-cigarette users. Indoor airborne nicotine, PM 2.5 , and PM 1.0 concentrations were measured as environmental markers of SHA. Biomarkers, including nicotine and its metabolites, tobacco-specific nitrosamines, propanediol, glycerol, and metals were measured in participants' saliva and urine samples. E-cigarette use characteristics, such as e-cigarette refill liquid's nicotine concentration, e-cigarette type, place of e-cigarette use at home, and frequency of ventilation, were also collected. A total of 29 e-cigarette users' homes and 21 control homes were included. The results showed that the seven-day concentrations of airborne nicotine were quantifiable in 21 (72.4 %) out of 29 e-cigarette users' homes; overall, they were quite low (geometric mean: 0.01 μg/m 3 ; 95 % CI: 0.01-0.02 μg/m 3 ) and were all below the limit of quantification in control homes. Seven-day concentrations of PM 2.5 and PM 1.0 in e-cigarette and control homes were similar. Airborne nicotine and PM concentrations did not differ according to different e-cigarette use characteristics. Non-users residing with e-cigarette users had low but significantly higher levels of cotinine, 3'-OH-cotinine and 1,2-propanediol in saliva, and cobalt in urine than non-users living in control homes. In conclusion, e-cigarette use at home created bystanders' exposure to SHA regardless of the e-cigarette use characteristics. Further studies are warranted to assess the implications of SHA exposure for smoke-free policy., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Secondhand electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) aerosol (SHA) might impair indoor air quality and expose bystanders. This study aims to investigate exposure to SHA in controlled conditions of enclosed settings simulating real-world scenario. An experiment was performed in a car and in a room, in which SHA was generated during a 30-minute ad libitum use of an e-cigarette. The experiment was replicated on five consecutive days in each setting. We measured PM 2.5 , airborne nicotine concentrations, and biomarkers of exposure to SHA, such as nicotine metabolites, tobacco-specific nitrosamines, propylene glycol, and glycerol in bystanders' saliva samples before, during, and after the exposure period. Self-reported health symptoms related to exposure to SHA were also recorded. The results showed that the highest median PM 2.5 concentration was recorded during the exposure period, being 21 µg/m 3 in the room setting and 16 µg/m 3 in the car setting-about twofold increase compared to the baseline. Most concentrations of the airborne nicotine and all biomarkers were below the limit of quantification in both settings. Bystanders in both settings experienced some short-term irritation symptoms, expressed as dry throat, nose, eyes, and phlegm. In conclusion, short-term use of an e-cigarette in confined spaces increased indoor PM 2.5 level and caused some irritation symptoms in bystanders., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: To assess the levels of a tobacco-specific nitrosamine (NNAL) in non-smokers passively exposed to the second-hand aerosol (SHA) emitted from users of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes)., Method: We conducted an observational study involving 55 non-smoking volunteers divided into three groups: 25 living at home with conventional smokers, 6 living with e-cigarette users, and 24 in control homes (smoke-free homes). We obtained urine samples from all volunteers to determine NNAL., Results: We detected NNAL in the urine of volunteers exposed to e-cigarettes (median:0.55 pg/mL; interquartile range: 0.26-2.94 pg/mL). The percentage of urine samples with quantifiable NNAL differed significantly among the three groups of homes: 29.2%, 66.7% and 76.0%, respectively (p=0.004)., Conclusions: We found NNAL nitrosamine in urine samples from people exposed to SHA from e-cigarettes. However, these results could be confirmed with more studies with larger sample sizes., (Copyright © 2018 SESPAS. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is scarce evidence about passive exposure to the vapour released or exhaled from electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) under real conditions. The aim of this study is to characterise passive exposure to nicotine from e-cigarettes' vapour and conventional cigarettes' smoke at home among non-smokers under real-use conditions., Methods: We conducted an observational study with 54 non-smoker volunteers from different homes: 25 living at home with conventional smokers, 5 living with nicotine e-cigarette users, and 24 from control homes (not using conventional cigarettes neither e-cigarettes). We measured airborne nicotine at home and biomarkers (cotinine in saliva and urine). We calculated geometric mean (GM) and geometric standard deviations (GSD). We also performed ANOVA and Student's t tests for the log-transformed data. We used Bonferroni-corrected t-tests to control the family error rate for multiple comparisons at 5%., Results: The GMs of airborne nicotine were 0.74 μg/m(3) (GSD=4.05) in the smokers' homes, 0.13 μg/m(3) (GSD=2.4) in the e-cigarettes users' homes, and 0.02 μg/m(3) (GSD=3.51) in the control homes. The GMs of salivary cotinine were 0.38 ng/ml (GSD=2.34) in the smokers' homes, 0.19 ng/ml (GSD=2.17) in the e-cigarettes users' homes, and 0.07 ng/ml (GSD=1.79) in the control homes. Salivary cotinine concentrations of the non-smokers exposed to e-cigarette's vapour at home (all exposed ≥ 2 h/day) were statistically significant different that those found in non-smokers exposed to second-hand smoke ≥ 2 h/day and in non-smokers from control homes., Conclusions: The airborne markers were statistically higher in conventional cigarette homes than in e-cigarettes homes (5.7 times higher). However, concentrations of both biomarkers among non-smokers exposed to conventional cigarettes and e-cigarettes' vapour were statistically similar (only 2 and 1.4 times higher, respectively). The levels of airborne nicotine and cotinine concentrations in the homes with e-cigarette users were higher than control homes (differences statistically significant). Our results show that non-smokers passively exposed to e-cigarettes absorb nicotine., (Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Inc.)