Pulmonary effects of e-liquid flavors: a systematic review.

IF 6.4 2区 医学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Felix Effah, Benjamin Taiwo, Deborah Baines, Alexis Bailey, Tim Marczylo
{"title":"Pulmonary effects of e-liquid flavors: a systematic review.","authors":"Felix Effah,&nbsp;Benjamin Taiwo,&nbsp;Deborah Baines,&nbsp;Alexis Bailey,&nbsp;Tim Marczylo","doi":"10.1080/10937404.2022.2124563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Electronic cigarettes (ECs) are purported to be tobacco harm-reduction products whose degree of harm has been highly debated. EC use is considered less hazardous than smoking but is not expected to be harmless. Following the banning of e-liquid flavors in countries such as the US, Finland, Ukraine, and Hungary, there are growing concerns regarding the safety profile of e-liquid flavors used in ECs. While these are employed extensively in the food industry and are generally regarded as safe (GRAS) when ingested, GRAS status after inhalation is unclear. The aim of this review was to assess evidence from 38 reports on the adverse effects of flavored e-liquids on the respiratory system in both <i>in vitro</i> and <i>in vivo</i> studies published between 2006 and 2021. Data collected demonstrated greater detrimental effects <i>in vitro</i> with cinnamon (9 articles), strawberry (5 articles), and menthol (10 articles), flavors than other flavors. The most reported effects among these investigations were perturbations of pro-inflammatory biomarkers and enhanced cytotoxicity. There is sufficient evidence to support the toxicological impacts of diacetyl- and cinnamaldehyde-containing e-liquids following human inhalation; however, safety profiles on other flavors are elusive. The latter may result from inconsistencies between experimental approaches and uncertainties due to the contributions from other e-liquid constituents. Further, the relevance of the concentration ranges to human exposure levels is uncertain. Evidence indicates that an adequately controlled and consistent, systematic toxicological investigation of a broad spectrum of e-liquid flavors may be required at biologically relevant concentrations to better inform public health authorities on the risk assessment following exposure to EC flavor ingredients.</p>","PeriodicalId":49971,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part B-Critical Reviews","volume":"25 7","pages":"343-371"},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9590402/pdf/","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health-Part B-Critical Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2022.2124563","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Electronic cigarettes (ECs) are purported to be tobacco harm-reduction products whose degree of harm has been highly debated. EC use is considered less hazardous than smoking but is not expected to be harmless. Following the banning of e-liquid flavors in countries such as the US, Finland, Ukraine, and Hungary, there are growing concerns regarding the safety profile of e-liquid flavors used in ECs. While these are employed extensively in the food industry and are generally regarded as safe (GRAS) when ingested, GRAS status after inhalation is unclear. The aim of this review was to assess evidence from 38 reports on the adverse effects of flavored e-liquids on the respiratory system in both in vitro and in vivo studies published between 2006 and 2021. Data collected demonstrated greater detrimental effects in vitro with cinnamon (9 articles), strawberry (5 articles), and menthol (10 articles), flavors than other flavors. The most reported effects among these investigations were perturbations of pro-inflammatory biomarkers and enhanced cytotoxicity. There is sufficient evidence to support the toxicological impacts of diacetyl- and cinnamaldehyde-containing e-liquids following human inhalation; however, safety profiles on other flavors are elusive. The latter may result from inconsistencies between experimental approaches and uncertainties due to the contributions from other e-liquid constituents. Further, the relevance of the concentration ranges to human exposure levels is uncertain. Evidence indicates that an adequately controlled and consistent, systematic toxicological investigation of a broad spectrum of e-liquid flavors may be required at biologically relevant concentrations to better inform public health authorities on the risk assessment following exposure to EC flavor ingredients.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

电子液体香精对肺部的影响:系统综述。
电子烟(ECs)被认为是一种减少烟草危害的产品,其危害程度一直备受争议。使用欧共体被认为比吸烟危害小,但并非无害。随着美国、芬兰、乌克兰和匈牙利等国家禁止使用电子液体香料,人们越来越担心电子烟中使用的电子液体香料的安全性。虽然这些在食品工业中广泛使用,并且在摄入时通常被认为是安全的(GRAS),但吸入后的GRAS状态尚不清楚。本综述的目的是评估2006年至2021年间发表的38份关于调味电子液体对呼吸系统不利影响的体外和体内研究报告的证据。收集的数据表明,肉桂(9篇文章)、草莓(5篇文章)和薄荷醇(10篇文章)的香料比其他香料的有害影响更大。这些研究中报道最多的影响是促炎生物标志物的扰动和细胞毒性的增强。有足够的证据支持含二乙酰和肉桂醛的电子液体在人体吸入后的毒理学影响;然而,其他口味的安全概况难以捉摸。后者可能是由于实验方法之间的不一致和其他电子液体成分的不确定性造成的。此外,浓度范围与人类暴露水平的相关性是不确定的。有证据表明,可能需要在生物学相关浓度下对广泛的电子液体香料进行充分控制和一致的系统毒理学调查,以便更好地告知公共卫生当局接触EC香料成分后的风险评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.80
自引率
6.90%
发文量
13
审稿时长
>24 weeks
期刊介绍: "Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health: Part B - Critical Reviews" is an academic journal published by Taylor & Francis, focusing on the critical examination of research in the areas of environmental exposure and population health. With an ISSN identifier of 1093-7404, this journal has established itself as a significant source of scholarly content in the field of toxicology and environmental health. Since its inception, the journal has published over 424 articles that have garnered 35,097 citations, reflecting its impact and relevance in the scientific community. Known for its comprehensive reviews, the journal also goes by the names "Critical Reviews" and "Journal of Toxicology & Environmental Health, Part B, Critical Reviews." The journal's mission is to provide a platform for in-depth analysis and critical discussion of the latest findings in toxicology, environmental health, and related disciplines. By doing so, it contributes to the advancement of knowledge and understanding of the complex interactions between environmental factors and human health, aiding in the development of strategies to protect and improve public health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信