Peter V Dicpinigaitis1, Alfredo Lee Chang2, Alis J Dicpinigaitis2, Abdissa Negassa3. 1. Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY; Department of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY. Electronic address: pdicpin@gmail.com. 2. Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY; Department of Medicine, Montefiore Medical Center, Bronx, NY. 3. Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: E-cigarettes (e-cigs) have attained widespread popularity, yet knowledge of their physiologic effects remains minimal. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a single exposure to e-cig vapor on cough reflex sensitivity. METHODS: Thirty healthy nonsmokers underwent cough reflex sensitivity measurement using capsaicin cough challenge at baseline, 15 min, and 24 h after e-cig exposure (30 puffs 30 s apart). The end point of cough challenge is the concentration of capsaicin inducing five or more coughs (C5). The number of coughs induced by each e-cig inhalation was counted. A subgroup of subjects (n = 8) subsequently underwent an identical protocol with a non-nicotine-containing e-cig. RESULTS: Cough reflex sensitivity was significantly inhibited (C5 increased) 15 min after e-cig use (?0.29; 95% CI, ?0.43 to ?0.15; P < .0001); 24 h later, C5 returned to baseline (0.24; 95% CI, 0.10-0.38; P = .0002 vs post-15-min value). A subgroup of eight subjects demonstrating the largest degree of cough reflex inhibition had no suppression after exposure to a non-nicotine-containing e-cig (P = .0078 for comparison of ?C5 after nicotine vs non-nicotine device). Furthermore, more coughing was induced by the nicotine-containing vs non-nicotine-containing device (P = .0156). CONCLUSIONS: A single session of e-cig use, approximating nicotine exposure of one tobacco cigarette, induces significant inhibition of cough reflex sensitivity. Exploratory analysis of a subgroup of subjects suggests that nicotine is responsible for this observation. Our data, consistent with previous studies of nicotine effect, suggest a dual action of nicotine: an immediate, peripheral protussive effect and a delayed central antitussive effect. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT02203162; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.
BACKGROUND: E-cigarettes (e-cigs) have attained widespread popularity, yet knowledge of their physiologic effects remains minimal. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a single exposure to e-cig vapor on cough reflex sensitivity. METHODS: Thirty healthy nonsmokers underwent cough reflex sensitivity measurement using capsaicin cough challenge at baseline, 15 min, and 24 h after e-cig exposure (30 puffs 30 s apart). The end point of cough challenge is the concentration of capsaicin inducing five or more coughs (C5). The number of coughs induced by each e-cig inhalation was counted. A subgroup of subjects (n = 8) subsequently underwent an identical protocol with a non-nicotine-containing e-cig. RESULTS: Cough reflex sensitivity was significantly inhibited (C5 increased) 15 min after e-cig use (?0.29; 95% CI, ?0.43 to ?0.15; P < .0001); 24 h later, C5 returned to baseline (0.24; 95% CI, 0.10-0.38; P = .0002 vs post-15-min value). A subgroup of eight subjects demonstrating the largest degree of cough reflex inhibition had no suppression after exposure to a non-nicotine-containing e-cig (P = .0078 for comparison of ?C5 after nicotine vs non-nicotine device). Furthermore, more coughing was induced by the nicotine-containing vs non-nicotine-containing device (P = .0156). CONCLUSIONS: A single session of e-cig use, approximating nicotine exposure of one tobacco cigarette, induces significant inhibition of cough reflex sensitivity. Exploratory analysis of a subgroup of subjects suggests that nicotine is responsible for this observation. Our data, consistent with previous studies of nicotine effect, suggest a dual action of nicotine: an immediate, peripheral protussive effect and a delayed central antitussive effect. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT02203162; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.
Authors: Alexsandra Ratajczak; Wojciech Feleszko; Danielle M Smith; Maciej Goniewicz Journal: Expert Rev Respir Med Date: 2018-06-08 Impact factor: 3.772
Authors: Sean E Corbett; Matthew Nitzberg; Elizabeth Moses; Eric Kleerup; Teresa Wang; Catalina Perdomo; Claudia Perdomo; Gang Liu; Xiaohui Xiao; Hanqiao Liu; David A Elashoff; Daniel R Brooks; George T O'Connor; Steven M Dubinett; Avrum Spira; Marc E Lenburg Journal: Chest Date: 2019-06-22 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Lauren F Chun; Farzad Moazed; Carolyn S Calfee; Michael A Matthay; Jeffrey E Gotts Journal: Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol Date: 2017-05-18 Impact factor: 5.464
Authors: Allison M Glasser; Lauren Collins; Jennifer L Pearson; Haneen Abudayyeh; Raymond S Niaura; David B Abrams; Andrea C Villanti Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2016-11-30 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Brendan J Canning; Qi Liu; Mayuko Tao; Robert DeVita; Michael Perelman; Douglas W Hay; Peter V Dicpinigaitis; Jing Liang Journal: J Pharmacol Exp Ther Date: 2021-11-15 Impact factor: 4.402
Authors: Alyn H Morice; Eva Millqvist; Kristina Bieksiene; Surinder S Birring; Peter Dicpinigaitis; Christian Domingo Ribas; Michele Hilton Boon; Ahmad Kantar; Kefang Lai; Lorcan McGarvey; David Rigau; Imran Satia; Jacky Smith; Woo-Jung Song; Thomy Tonia; Jan W K van den Berg; Mirjam J G van Manen; Angela Zacharasiewicz Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2020-01-02 Impact factor: 16.671