Insights from two industrial hygiene pilot e-cigarette passive vaping studies

Assessment of worker chemical exposures in California vape shops

E-cigarettes are battery-operated devices that heat a liquid mixture to make an aerosol that is inhaled, or vaped, by the user. Vape shops are retail environments designed to fulfill customer demand for diverse e-liquid flavors and hardware options, which create unique worker exposure concerns. To characterize exposures to vape shop workers, especially to flavoring chemicals associated with known respiratory toxicity, this study recruited vape shops from the San Francisco Bay Area. In six shops, we measured air concentrations for volatile organic compounds, formaldehyde, flavoring chemicals, and nicotine in personal and/or area samples; analyzed components of e-liquids vaped during field visits; and assessed metals on surface wipe samples. Interviews and observations were conducted over the course of a workday in the same six shops and interviews were performed in an additional six where sampling was not conducted. Detections of the alpha-diketone butter flavoring chemicals diacetyl and/or 2,3-pentanedione were common: in the headspace of purchased e-liquids (18 of 26 samples), in personal air samples (5 of 16), and in area air samples (2 of 6 shops). Two exceedances of recommended exposure limits for 2,3-pentanedione (a short-term exposure limit and an 8-hr time-weighted average) were measured in personal air samples. Other compounds detected in the area and personal air samples included substitutes for diacetyl and 2,3-pentanedione (acetoin and 2,3-hexanedione) and compounds that may be contaminants or impurities. Furthermore, a large variety (82) of other flavoring chemicals were detected in area air samples. None of the 12 shops interviewed had a health and safety program. Six shops reported no use of any personal protective equipment (PPE) (e.g., gloves, chemical resistant aprons, eye protection) and the others stated occasional use; however, no PPE use was observed during any field investigation day. Recommendations were provided to shops that included making improvements to ventilation, hygiene, use of personal protective equipment, and, if possible, avoidance of products containing the alpha-diketone flavoring chemicals. Future research is needed to evaluate the long-term health risks among workers in the vape shop retail industry and for e-cigarette use generally. Specific areas include further characterizing e-liquid constituents and emissions, evaluating ingredient health risks, evaluating the contributions of different routes of exposure (dermal, inhalation, and ingestion), and determining effective exposure mitigation measures.

Prediction of potential passive exposure from commercial electronic nicotine delivery systems using exhaled breath analysis and computational fluid dynamic techniques

Use of computational fluid dynamic (CFD) modeling to predict temporal and spatial constituent exposure for non-electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) users (passive exposure) provides a more efficient methodology compared to conducting actual exposure studies. We conducted a clinical study measuring exhaled breath concentrations of glycerin, propylene glycol, nicotine, benzoic acid, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, menthol and carbon monoxide from use of eight different commercial ENDS devices and a non-menthol and menthol cigarette. Because baseline adjusted levels of other constituents were not consistently above the limit of detection, the mean minimum and maximum per puff exhaled breath concentrations (N= 20/product) of glycerin (158.7-260.9µg), propylene glycol (0.941-3.58µg), nicotine (0.10-1.06µg), and menthol (0.432-0.605µg) from use of the ENDS products were used as input parameters to predict temporal and spatial concentrations in an environmental chamber, office, restaurant, and car using different ENDS use scenarios. Among these indoor locations and ENDS use scenarios, the car with closed windows resulted in the greatest concentrations while opening the car windows produced the lowest concentrations. The CFD predicted average maximum glycerin and propylene glycol concentration ranged from 0.25 to 1068µg m^-3and 1.5 pg m^-3to 13.56µg m^-3,respectively. For nicotine and menthol the CFD predicted maximum concentration ranged from 0.16 pg m^-3to 4.02µg m^-3and 0.068 pg m^-3to 2.43µg m^-3, respectively. There was better agreement for CFD-predicted nicotine concentrations than glycerin and propylene glycol with published reports highlighting important experimental and computational variables. Maximum measured nicotine levels from environmental tobacco smoke in offices, restaurants, and cars exceeded our maximum average CFD predictions by 7-97 times. For all the measured exhaled breath constituents and CFD predicted constituents, except for propylene glycol and glycerin, concentrations were less from use of ENDS products compared to combustible cigarettes. NCT number: NCT04143256.

Identification of newly formed toxic chemicals in E-cigarette aerosols with Orbitrap mass spectrometry and implications on E-cigarette control

The increasing use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) is of concern due to multiple emerging adverse health effects. Most analyses of the harmful chemicals of ENDS have targeted metals or carbonyls generated by thermal decomposition of carrier liquids such as propylene glycol. However, new complex compounds not routinely identified and with unknown health consequences could be formed. ENDS aerosol samples were collected by the direct aerosol droplet deposition method. Untargeted analysis was performed using Orbitrap mass spectrometry with high mass accuracy. We identified more than 30 "features" in the aerosol characterized by pairs of the mass-to-charge ratio "m/z" of the compound and the retention time. We identified several compounds containing nicotine and propylene glycol (NIC-PG), whose abundance relative to nicotine increased along with vaping power used. On the basis of the prediction by the Environmental Protection Agency Toxicity Estimation Software Tool, these compounds exert developmental toxicity. In addition, a nitrogen-containing compound, likely tributylamine (a known lung irritant), was identified based on the molecular weight. This compound has not been previously identified in ENDS e-liquids and aerosols. ENDS produce not only small toxic compounds such as aldehydes, but also large complex toxic compounds such as NIC-PG. Predicted development toxicity for NIC-PG is concerning for fetal development in pregnant women who use ENDS, children exposed to secondhand or thirdhand ENDS aerosols, and teenage ENDS users whose brains are still developing. The strong positive association between NIC-PG levels and ENDS power output supports regulating high-powered ENDS.

Toxicology of flavoring- and cannabis-containing e-liquids used in electronic delivery systems

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) were introduced in the United States in 2007 and by 2014 they were the most popular tobacco product amongst youth and had overtaken use of regular tobacco cigarettes. E-cigarettes are used to aerosolize a liquid (e-liquid) that the user inhales. Flavorings in e-liquids is a primary reason for youth to initiate use of e-cigarettes. Evidence is growing in the scientific literature that inhalation of some flavorings is not without risk of harm. In this review, 67 original articles (primarily cellular in vitro) on the toxicity of flavored e-liquids were identified in the PubMed and Scopus databases and evaluated critically. At least 65 individual flavoring ingredients in e-liquids or aerosols from e-cigarettes induced toxicity in the respiratory tract, cardiovascular and circulatory systems, skeletal system, and skin. Cinnamaldehyde was most frequently reported to be cytotoxic, followed by vanillin, menthol, ethyl maltol, ethyl vanillin, benzaldehyde and linalool. Additionally, modern e-cigarettes can be modified to aerosolize cannabis as dried plant material or a concentrated extract. The U.S. experienced an outbreak of lung injuries, termed e-cigarette, or vaping, product use-associated lung injury (EVALI) that began in 2019; among 2,022 hospitalized patients who had data on substance use (as of January 14, 2020), 82% reported using a delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (main psychoactive component in cannabis) containing e-cigarette, or vaping, product. Our literature search identified 33 articles related to EVALI. Vitamin E acetate, a diluent and thickening agent in cannabis-based products, was strongly linked to the EVALI outbreak in epidemiologic and laboratory studies; however, e-liquid chemistry is highly complex, and more than one mechanism of lung injury, ingredient, or thermal breakdown product may be responsible for toxicity. More research is needed, particularly with regard to e-cigarettes (generation, power settings, etc.), e-liquids (composition, bulk or vaped form), modeled systems (cell type, culture type, and dosimetry metrics), biological monitoring, secondhand exposures and contact with residues that contain nicotine and flavorings, and causative agents and mechanisms of EVALI toxicity.

Room air constituent concentrations from use of electronic nicotine delivery systems and cigarettes using different ventilation conditions

To assess potential exposure of non-users to exhaled constituents from pod and cartridge electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) products, an environmental clinical study was conducted with (n = 43) healthy adult smokers. Room air concentrations of 34 selected constituents (nicotine, propylene glycol, glycerin, 15 carbonyls, 12 volatile organic compounds, and 4 trace metals) and particle number concentration (0.3 to 25 µm) were compared from use of two ENDS products and conventional cigarettes using room ventilations representative of a residential, an office or a hospitality setting over a 4-h. exposure period. Products used were JUUL ENDS, Virginia Tobacco flavor (Group I), VUSE Solo, Original flavor (Group II) (5.0 and 4.8% nicotine by weight, respectively) and subjects' own conventional cigarettes (Group III). Cumulative 4-h room air sampling and particle counting were performed during prescribed (Groups I and II) and ad libitum product use (all Groups). Conventional cigarette use resulted in significantly more constituents detected and higher 4-h cumulative constituent concentrations compared to use of the ENDS products tested, except for the predominant ENDS ingredients, propylene glycol and glycerin. Use of conventional cigarettes also resulted in greater total particle number concentration than either prescribed or ad libitum use of either of the ENDS used in this study.

Evaluation of Second-Hand Exposure to Electronic Cigarette Vaping under a Real Scenario: Measurements of Ultrafine Particle Number Concentration and Size Distribution and Comparison with Traditional Tobacco Smoke

The present study aims to evaluate the impact of e-cig second-hand aerosol on indoor air quality in terms of ultrafine particles (UFPs) and potential inhalation exposure levels of passive bystanders. E-cig second-hand aerosol characteristics in terms of UFPs number concentration and size distribution exhaled by two volunteers vaping 15 different e-liquids inside a 49 m3 room and comparison with tobacco smoke are discussed. High temporal resolution measurements were performed under natural ventilation conditions to simulate a realistic exposure scenario. Results showed a systematic increase in UFPs number concentration (part cm-3) related to a 20-min vaping session (from 6.56 × 103 to 4.01 × 104 part cm-3), although this was one up to two order of magnitude lower than that produced by one tobacco cigarette consumption (from 1.12 × 105 to 1.46 × 105 part cm-3). E-cig second-hand aerosol size distribution exhibits a bimodal behavior with modes at 10.8 and 29.4 nm in contrast with the unimodal typical size distribution of tobacco smoke with peak mode at 100 nm. In the size range 6-26 nm, particles concentration in e-cig second-hand aerosol were from 2- (Dp = 25.5 nm) to 3800-fold (Dp = 9.31 nm) higher than in tobacco smoke highlighting that particles exhaled by users and potentially inhaled by bystanders are nano-sized with high penetration capacity into human airways.

[Exposure of vapers to formaldehyde and acrolein: A systematic review]

Although recognized as less dangerous than conventional cigarettes, the toxicity of the electronic cigarette vapor's toxicity remains to be fully assessed. This review explores vapers' exposition to formaldehyde and acrolein.

METHOD

Systematic PubMed search for reports regarding formaldehyde or acrolein or their metabolites in electronic cigarette vapor, in vapers, or in ambient air.

RESULTS

Fifty-two publications were selected. Found in almost all studies on vaper, formaldehyde is 8 times out of 11 - and acrolein constantly - in lower amounts than those found in conventional cigarettes. Acrolein's metabolite is found in all studies in vapers. The concentrations of formaldehyde and/or acrolein generated during vapor production may be affected by the characteristics of the E-liquid, voltage, vaping topography, and by the flavor additives.

CONCLUSION

In the current state of knowledge, we must continue to support and help smokers to quit smoking, and for those who are engaged in a harm reduction approach, to minimize the duration of their electronic cigarette use.

Identification and quantification of electronic cigarette exhaled aerosol residue chemicals in field sites

BACKGROUND

Electronic cigarette (EC) users may exhale large clouds of aerosol that can settle on indoor surfaces forming ECEAR (EC exhaled aerosol residue). Little is known about the chemical composition or buildup of this residue.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to identify and quantify ECEAR chemicals in two field sites: an EC user's living room and a multi-user EC vape shop.

METHODS

We examined the buildup of ECEAR in commonly used materials (cotton, polyester, or terrycloth towel) placed inside the field sites. Materials were subjected to different lengths of exposure. Nicotine, nicotine alkaloids, and tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs) were identified and quantified in unexposed controls and field site samples using analytical chemical techniques.

RESULTS

Nicotine and nicotine alkaloids were detected in materials inside the EC user's living room. Concentrations of ECEAR chemicals remained relatively constant over the first 5 months, suggesting some removal of the chemicals by air flow in the room approximating a steady state. ECEAR chemicals were detected in materials inside the vape shop after 6 h of exposure and levels continually increased over a month. By 1 month, the nicotine in the vape shop was 60 times higher than in the EC user's living room. ECEAR chemical concentrations varied in different locations in the vape shop. Control fabrics had either no detectable or very low concentrations of chemicals.

CONCLUSIONS

In both field sites, chemicals from exhaled EC aerosols were deposited on indoor surfaces and accumulated over time forming ECEAR. Non-smokers, EC users, and employees of vape shops should be aware of this potential environmental hazard.

Influence of electronic cigarette vaping on the composition of indoor organic pollutants, particles, and exhaled breath of bystanders

The changes of particles and organic pollutants in indoor atmospheres as consequence of vaping with electronic cigarettes have been analyzed. Changes in the composition of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in exhaled breath of non-smoking volunteers present in the vaping environments have also been studied. The exposure experiments involved non-vaping (n = 5) and vaping (n = 5) volunteers staying 12 h together in a room (54 m²) without external ventilation. The same experiment was repeated without vaping for comparison. Changes in the distributions of particles in the 8-400 nm range were observed, involving losses of nucleation-mode particles (below 20 nm) and increases of coagulation processes leading to larger size particles. In quantitative terms, vaping involved doubling the indoor concentrations of particles smaller than 10 μm, 5 μm, and 1 μm observed during no vaping. The increase of particle mass concentrations was probably produced from bulk ingredients of the e-liquid exhaled by the e-cigarette users. Black carbon concentrations in the indoor and outdoor air were similar in the presence and absence of electronic cigarette emissions. Changes in the qualitative composition of PAHs were observed when comparing vaping and non-vaping days. The nicotine concentrations were examined separately in the gas and in the particulate phases showing that most of the differences between both days were recorded in the former. The particulate phase should therefore be included in nicotine monitoring during vaping (and smoking). The concentration increases of nicotine and formaldehyde were small when compared with those described in other studies of indoor atmospheres or health regulatory thresholds. No significant changes were observed when comparing the concentrations of exhaled breath in vaping and no vaping days. Even the exhaled breath nicotine concentrations in both conditions were similar. As expected, toluene, xylenes, benzene, ethylbenzene, and naphthalene did not show increases in the vaping days since combustion was not involved.

A distributed computational model for estimating room air level of constituents due to aerosol emission from e-vapor product use

Most indoor air quality models reported in the literature are well-mixed models. A well-mixed model estimates the room average concentration of constituents from sources. It does not provide information on (1) how far and how fast the emitted chemicals travel in the indoor space? And (2) how the concentration changes as a function of distance from the emission source? We developed a distributed model, using computational fluid dynamics and thermodynamics principles, which allows for aerosol dispersion in an indoor space and includes evaporation and condensation of constituents in a multi-compound aerosol mixture. The distributed model can estimate the spatial and temporal variations of the concentration of individual constituents present in the emitted aerosol in vapor and particulate phases separately. Results from the model were compared with the published experimental data and were found to be in good agreement. A sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of various parameters that affect the air level of the emitted constituents within an indoor space, including rate of emission, the rate of air exchange, etc. The model can also be used to estimate the level of second hand exposure in a confined space where e-vapor products (EVPs) are used.

Determination of Selected Chemical Levels in Room Air and on Surfaces after the Use of Cartridge- and Tank-Based E-Vapor Products or Conventional Cigarettes

There is an ongoing debate regarding the potential of secondhand exposure of non-users to various chemicals from use of e-vapor products (EVPs). Room air levels of 34 chemicals (nicotine, propylene glycol (PG), glycerol, 15 carbonyl chemicals, 12 volatile organic chemicals (VOCs), and four selected trace elements) were measured where EVPs and cigarettes were used by n = 37 healthy adult tobacco users in an exposure chamber. The products used were MarkTen^® 2.5% Classic (Group I), a Prototype GreenSmoke^® 2.4% (Group II), Ego-T^® Tank with subjects' own e-liquids (Group III) and subjects' own conventional cigarettes (Group IV). Products were used under controlled conditions and 4-h ad libitum use. Background (without subjects) and baseline levels (with subjects) were measured. Cumulative 4-h. levels of nicotine, PG and glycerol measured were several-fold below the time-weighted average limits used in workplace exposure evaluation. Most the other chemicals (>75%) were at or below the limit of quantification during EVP use. Significant levels of chemicals (17 out of 34) were observed in Group IV. Overall, our results indicate that under the study conditions with the products tested, cumulative room air levels of the selected chemicals measured over 4-h were relatively small and were several-fold below the current occupational regulatory and consensus limits.

Overview of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Rapid developments in e-cigarettes, or electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), and the evolution of the overall tobacco product marketplace warrant frequent evaluation of the published literature. The purpose of this article is to report updated findings from a comprehensive review of the published scientific literature on ENDS.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The authors conducted a systematic review of published empirical research literature on ENDS through May 31, 2016, using a detailed search strategy in the PubMed electronic database, expert review, and additional targeted searches. Included studies presented empirical findings and were coded to at least one of nine topics: (1) Product Features; (2) Health Effects; (3) Consumer Perceptions; (4) Patterns of Use; (5) Potential to Induce Dependence; (6) Smoking Cessation; (7) Marketing and Communication; (8) Sales; and (9) Policies; reviews and commentaries were excluded. Data from included studies were extracted by multiple coders (October 2015 to August 2016) into a standardized form and synthesized qualitatively by topic.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

There were 687 articles included in this systematic review. The majority of studies assessed patterns of ENDS use and consumer perceptions of ENDS, followed by studies examining health effects of vaping and product features.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies indicate that ENDS are increasing in use, particularly among current smokers, pose substantially less harm to smokers than cigarettes, are being used to reduce/quit smoking, and are widely available. More longitudinal studies and controlled trials are needed to evaluate the impact of ENDS on population-level tobacco use and determine the health effects of longer-term vaping.

A Well-Mixed Computational Model for Estimating Room Air Levels of Selected Constituents from E-Vapor Product Use

Concerns have been raised in the literature for the potential of secondhand exposure from e-vapor product (EVP) use. It would be difficult to experimentally determine the impact of various factors on secondhand exposure including, but not limited to, room characteristics (indoor space size, ventilation rate), device specifications (aerosol mass delivery, e-liquid composition), and use behavior (number of users and usage frequency). Therefore, a well-mixed computational model was developed to estimate the indoor levels of constituents from EVPs under a variety of conditions. The model is based on physical and thermodynamic interactions between aerosol, vapor, and air, similar to indoor air models referred to by the Environmental Protection Agency. The model results agree well with measured indoor air levels of nicotine from two sources: smoking machine-generated aerosol and aerosol exhaled from EVP use. Sensitivity analysis indicated that increasing air exchange rate reduces room air level of constituents, as more material is carried away. The effect of the amount of aerosol released into the space due to variability in exhalation was also evaluated. The model can estimate the room air level of constituents as a function of time, which may be used to assess the level of non-user exposure over time.

Health professionals in Flanders perceive the potential health risks of vaping as lower than those of smoking but do not recommend using e-cigarettes to their smoking patients

Background

Many misperceptions of both risks and opportunities of e-cigarettes (e-cigs) exist among the general population and among physicians, although e-cigs could be a valuable harm reduction tool for current smokers.

Methods

Two groups in Flanders, namely general practitioners (GPs; family doctors) and tobacco counselors filled out an online questionnaire with regard to their attitudes and risk perceptions concerning e-cigs. Statements included were on the safety and the addictive properties of e-cigs in absolute terms, whereas other items compared e-cigs with regular tobacco cigarettes. Statements about possible “gateway” and “renormalization” effects, selling to minors, and use in public places and on the potential of e-cigs as a smoking cessation aid were also included. Respondents were also asked for the rate at which their patients asked information about e-cigs, if they would recommend e-cigs to their smoking patients, and whether they had information brochures on e-cigs.

Results

About 70 % believed that e-cigs are harmful to vapers, and about half to two thirds believed that e-cigs are carcinogenic, increase cardiovascular risk, and increase the risk of chronic lung disease. Also, a substantial minority incorrectly believed these risks to be no less than those resulting from regular smoking. Ten to almost 20 % disagreed that e-cigs are healthier and represent less risk for the main serious smoking-related diseases than conventional cigarettes. More than half of the respondents disagreed that e-cigs are an effective smoking cessation aid. None (0 %) offered the strongest level of agreement for recommending e-cigs to their clients/patients, but GPs agreed to a lesser degree a bit more often than tobacco counselors. Almost none had information leaflets for potentially interested patients. Finally, the majority of our sample also believed that e-cigs will cause renormalization of smoking and that e-cigs will lead to an uptake of conventional smoking and disagreed with allowing vaping in enclosed public places.

Conclusions

Health professionals in Flanders perceive the potential health risks of vaping as lower than those of smoking but do not recommend using e-cigs to their smoking patients.