Di Zhao1, Ana Navas-Acien2, Vesna Ilievski2, Vesna Slavkovich2, Pablo Olmedo3, Bernat Adria-Mora2, Arce Domingo-Relloso2, Angela Aherrera4, Norman J Kleiman2, Ana M Rule4, Markus Hilpert5. 1. State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, School of the Environment, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China; Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. 2. Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. 3. Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA; Department of Legal Medicine and Toxicology, School of Medicine, University of Granada, Spain. 4. Department of Environmental Health and Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA. 5. Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: mh3632@columbia.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electronic cigarettes (E-cigarettes) generate aerosol containing metal contaminants. Our goals were to quantify aerosol metal concentrations and to compare the effects of power setting and device type (closed-system vs. open-system) on metal release. METHODS: Aerosol samples were collected from two closed-system devices (a cigalike and pod) and two open-system devices (mods). Each open-system device was operated at three different power settings to examine the effect of device power on metal release. Concentrations of 14 metals in e-cigarette aerosol collected via droplet deposition were measured using inductively coupled plasma mass spectroscopy. Aerosol metal concentrations were reported as mass fractions (μg/kg) in the e-liquid. RESULTS: For open-system device 1 (OD1), median arsenic (As), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), nickel (Ni), lead (Pb), antimony (Sb), tin (Sn), and zinc (Zn) concentrations increased 14, 54, 17, 30, 41, 96, 14, 81, 631, and 7-fold when the device power was increased from low (20 W) to intermediate (40 W) setting. When the power was further increased from intermediate (40 W) to high (80 W) setting, concentrations of As, Cr, Cu, Mn, Ni, and Sb did not change significantly. For open-system device 2 (OD2), Cr and Mn concentrations increased significantly when device power was increased from low (40 W) to intermediate (120 W) setting, and then decreased significantly when power was further increased from intermediate (120 W) to high (200 W) setting. Among the four devices, aerosol metal concentrations were higher for the open-system than the closed-system devices, except for aluminum (Al) and uranium (U). For Cr, median (interquartile range) concentrations (μg/kg) from the open-system devices were 2.51 (1.55, 4.23) and 15.6 (7.88, 54.5) vs. 0.39 (0.05, 0.72) and 0.41 (0.34, 0.57) for the closed-system devices. For Ni, concentrations (μg/kg) from the open-system devices were 793 (508, 1169) and 2148 (851, 3397) vs. 1.32 (0.39, 3.35) and 11.9 (10.7, 22.7) from the closed-system devices. Inhalation of 0% and 100% of samples from OD1, 7.4% and 88.9% from OD2 by typical e-cigarette users would exceed chronic minimum risk levels (MRL) of Mn and Ni, respectively. No MRL exceedance was predicted for the closed-system devices. A large fraction of users of OD1 (100%) and OD2 (77.8%) would be exposed to Ni levels higher than those from reference tobacco cigarette 3R4F. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that power setting and device type affect metal release from devices to aerosol which would subsequently be inhaled by users. Metal concentrations from open-system devices first increased with device power, and then leveled off for most metals. Open-system devices generate aerosol with higher metal concentrations than closed-system devices. These findings inform tobacco regulatory science, policy makers and health professionals on potential metal health risks associated with e-cigarette use, design and manufacturing.
BACKGROUND: Electronic cigarettes (E-cigarettes) generate aerosol containing metal contaminants. Our goals were to quantify aerosol metal concentrations and to compare the effects of power setting and device type (closed-system vs. open-system) on metal release. METHODS: Aerosol samples were collected from two closed-system devices (a cigalike and pod) and two open-system devices (mods). Each open-system device was operated at three different power settings to examine the effect of device power on metal release. Concentrations of 14 metals in e-cigarette aerosol collected via droplet deposition were measured using inductively coupled plasma mass spectroscopy. Aerosol metal concentrations were reported as mass fractions (μg/kg) in the e-liquid. RESULTS: For open-system device 1 (OD1), median arsenic (As), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), nickel (Ni), lead (Pb), antimony (Sb), tin (Sn), and zinc (Zn) concentrations increased 14, 54, 17, 30, 41, 96, 14, 81, 631, and 7-fold when the device power was increased from low (20 W) to intermediate (40 W) setting. When the power was further increased from intermediate (40 W) to high (80 W) setting, concentrations of As, Cr, Cu, Mn, Ni, and Sb did not change significantly. For open-system device 2 (OD2), Cr and Mn concentrations increased significantly when device power was increased from low (40 W) to intermediate (120 W) setting, and then decreased significantly when power was further increased from intermediate (120 W) to high (200 W) setting. Among the four devices, aerosol metal concentrations were higher for the open-system than the closed-system devices, except for aluminum (Al) and uranium (U). For Cr, median (interquartile range) concentrations (μg/kg) from the open-system devices were 2.51 (1.55, 4.23) and 15.6 (7.88, 54.5) vs. 0.39 (0.05, 0.72) and 0.41 (0.34, 0.57) for the closed-system devices. For Ni, concentrations (μg/kg) from the open-system devices were 793 (508, 1169) and 2148 (851, 3397) vs. 1.32 (0.39, 3.35) and 11.9 (10.7, 22.7) from the closed-system devices. Inhalation of 0% and 100% of samples from OD1, 7.4% and 88.9% from OD2 by typical e-cigarette users would exceed chronic minimum risk levels (MRL) of Mn and Ni, respectively. No MRL exceedance was predicted for the closed-system devices. A large fraction of users of OD1 (100%) and OD2 (77.8%) would be exposed to Ni levels higher than those from reference tobacco cigarette 3R4F. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that power setting and device type affect metal release from devices to aerosol which would subsequently be inhaled by users. Metal concentrations from open-system devices first increased with device power, and then leveled off for most metals. Open-system devices generate aerosol with higher metal concentrations than closed-system devices. These findings inform tobacco regulatory science, policy makers and health professionals on potential metal health risks associated with e-cigarette use, design and manufacturing.
Authors: Vladimir B Mikheev; Marielle C Brinkman; Courtney A Granville; Sydney M Gordon; Pamela I Clark Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2016-05-04 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Leon Kosmider; Tory R Spindle; Michal Gawron; Andrzej Sobczak; Maciej Lukasz Goniewicz Journal: Food Chem Toxicol Date: 2018-03-20 Impact factor: 6.023
Authors: Suchitra Krishnan-Sarin; Asti Jackson; Meghan Morean; Grace Kong; Krysten W Bold; Deepa R Camenga; Dana A Cavallo; Patricia Simon; Ran Wu Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2018-11-15 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Angela Aherrera; Pablo Olmedo; Maria Grau-Perez; Stefan Tanda; Walter Goessler; Stephanie Jarmul; Rui Chen; Joanna E Cohen; Ana M Rule; Ana Navas-Acien Journal: Environ Res Date: 2017-08-21 Impact factor: 6.498
Authors: Adam Prokopowicz; Andrzej Sobczak; Magdalena Szuła-Chraplewska; Patryk Ochota; Leon Kośmider Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-08-19 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Konstantinos E Farsalinos; Vassilis Voudris; Konstantinos Poulas Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2015-05-15 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Di Zhao; Vesna Ilievski; Vesna Slavkovich; Pablo Olmedo; Arce Domingo-Relloso; Ana M Rule; Norman J Kleiman; Ana Navas-Acien; Markus Hilpert Journal: Environ Res Date: 2021-10-27 Impact factor: 8.431
Authors: Markus Hilpert; Vesna Ilievski; Maxine Coady; Maria Andrade-Gutierrez; Beizhan Yan; Steven N Chillrud; Ana Navas-Acien; Norman J Kleiman Journal: Inhal Toxicol Date: 2019-12-04 Impact factor: 2.724
Authors: Markus Hilpert; Vesna Ilievski; Shao-Yiu Hsu; Ana M Rule; Pablo Olmedo; German Drazer Journal: J Colloid Interface Sci Date: 2020-10-12 Impact factor: 8.128
Authors: Karem H Alzoubi; Rahaf M Batran; Nour A Al-Sawalha; Omar F Khabour; Nareg Karaoghlanian; Alan Shihadeh; Thomas Eissenberg Journal: Inhal Toxicol Date: 2021-07-27 Impact factor: 3.011