| Literature DB >> 33615833 |
Mary Rezk-Hanna1, Douglas R Seals2, Matthew J Rossman2, Rajat Gupta3, Charlie O Nettle1, Angelica Means1, Daniel Dobrin1, Chiao-Wei Cheng1, Mary-Lynn Brecht1, Zab Mosenifar4, Jesus A Araujo3,5, Neal L Benowitz6.
Abstract
Background Electronic hookah (e-hookah) vaping has increased in popularity among youth, who endorse unsubstantiated claims that flavored aerosol is detoxified as it passes through water. However, e-hookahs deliver nicotine by creating an aerosol of fine and ultrafine particles and other oxidants that may reduce the bioavailability of nitric oxide and impair endothelial function secondary to formation of oxygen-derived free radicals. Methods and Results We examined the acute effects of e-hookah vaping on endothelial function, and the extent to which increased oxidative stress contributes to the vaping-induced vascular impairment. Twenty-six healthy young adult habitual hookah smokers were invited to vape a 30-minute e-hookah session to evaluate the impact on endothelial function measured by brachial artery flow-mediated dilation (FMD). To test for oxidative stress mediation, plasma total antioxidant capacity levels were measured and the effect of e-hookah vaping on FMD was examined before and after intravenous infusion of the antioxidant ascorbic acid (n=11). Plasma nicotine and exhaled carbon monoxide levels were measured before and after the vaping session. Measurements were performed before and after sham-vaping control experiments (n=10). E-hookah vaping, which increased plasma nicotine (+4.93±0.92 ng/mL, P<0.001; mean±SE) with no changes in exhaled carbon monoxide (-0.15±0.17 ppm; P=0.479), increased mean arterial pressure (11±1 mm Hg, P<0.001) and acutely decreased FMD from 5.79±0.58% to 4.39±0.46% (P<0.001). Ascorbic acid infusion, which increased plasma total antioxidant capacity 5-fold, increased FMD at baseline (5.98±0.66% versus 9.46±0.87%, P<0.001), and prevented the acute FMD impairment by e-hookah vaping (9.46±0.87% versus 8.74±0.84%, P=0.002). All parameters were unchanged during sham studies. Conclusions E-hookah vaping has adverse effects on vascular function, likely mediated by oxidative stress, which overtime could accelerate development and progression of cardiovascular disease. Registration URL: https://ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03690427.Entities:
Keywords: ascorbic acid; electronic hookah; electronic waterpipe; endothelial function; oxidative stress
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33615833 PMCID: PMC8174254 DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.120.019271
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Am Heart Assoc ISSN: 2047-9980 Impact factor: 6.106
FIGURE 1E‐hookah bowl schematic.
An e‐hookah bowl, placed on a traditional waterpipe, is a rechargeable battery‐operated device consisting of a power source and a heating element vaporizing flavored e‐hookah liquid. As the user inhales through the hose, the negative pressure generated causes the aerosol to pass through the water‐filled basin and into the user’s mouth.
Subject Characteristics
| Variables | No. or Mean±SD |
|---|---|
| No. | 26 |
| Age, y | 26±4 |
| Women/men | 7/19 |
| Body mass index, kg·m2 | 24.0±2.7 |
| Race/Ethnicity | |
| Non‐Hispanic White | 7 |
| Non‐Hispanic Black | 6 |
| Hispanic | 2 |
| Asian | 7 |
| Middle‐Eastern origin | 4 |
| Level of education attained | |
| High school | 2 |
| College | 21 |
| Graduate | 3 |
| Smoking history | |
| No. of hookah sessions, per week | 3±2 |
| Usual hookah session duration, min | 118±52 |
| No. of people sharing hookah | 2±1 |
| Age of traditional hookah smoking onset, y | |
|
| 5 |
| 18–24 | 17 |
| 25–29 | 4 |
Data reported as number or mean±SD.
Acute Effects of E‐Hookah (n=26) Versus Sham (n=10) Vaping on Hemodynamics, Exposure Biomarkers, and Vascular Parameters
| Variable | Pre E‐Hookah | Post E‐Hookah | Δ (Post–Pre) |
| Pre Sham | Post Sham | Δ(Post– Pre) |
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Heart rate, beats·min−1 | 67±2 | 75±2 | +8±2 | <0.001 | 69±4 | 66±4 | −3±1 | 0.031 | |||||
| Blood pressure, mm Hg | |||||||||||||
| Systolic | 110±2 | 126±2 | +15±1 | <0.001 | 114±3 | 111±4 | −3±3 | 0.232 | |||||
| Diastolic | 68±1 | 77±2 | +10±1 | <0.001 | 74±4 | 73±3 | −1±2 | 0.674 | |||||
| Pulse pressure | 43±1 | 48±2 | +6±1 | <0.001 | 40±2 | 38±2 | −3±2 | 0.222 | |||||
| Mean arterial pressure | 82±1 | 93±2 | +11±1 | <0.001 | 88±3 | 86±3 | −2±2 | 0.353 | |||||
| Exposure biomarkers | |||||||||||||
| Plasma nicotine, ng/mL | 0.60±0.07 | 5.52±0.93 | +4.93±0.92 | <0.001 | 0.90±0.40 | 0.74±0.24 | −0.16±0.16 | 0.317 | |||||
| Expired carbon monoxide, ppm | 2.96±0.28 | 2.84±0.29 | −0.15±0.17 | 0.475 | 3.03±0.62 | 3.13±0.49 | +0.10±0.16 | 0.538 | |||||
| Vascular parameters | |||||||||||||
| Flow‐mediated dilation, % | 5.79±0.58 | 4.39±0.46 | –1.41±0.17 | <0.001 | 6.29±0.72 | 6.50±0.77 | +0.20±0.14 | ||||||
| Flow‐mediated dilation, mmΔ | 0.19±0.02 | 0.14±0.02 | –0.05±0.01 | <0.001 | 0.19±0.02 | 0.21±0.02 | +0.01±0.01 | 0.168 | |||||
| Baseline artery diameter, mm | 3.34±0.06 | 3.29±0.07 | –0.04±0.04 | 0.049 | 3.16±0.16 | 3.21±0.15 | +0.05±0.04 | 0.067 | |||||
| Peak artery diameter, mm | 3.53±0.07 | 3.44±0.07 | –0.09±0.04 | 0.029 | 3.35±0.16 | 3.41±0.16 | +0.06±0.04 | 0.226 | |||||
| Time to peak diameter, seconds | 33.65±1.63 | 41.54±1.69 | +7.88±1.12 | <0.001 | 29.50±0.40 | 27.50±1.84 | −2.00±1.69 | 0.176 | |||||
| Peak shear rate, s−1 | 2160.63±100.42 | 2127.54±115.21 | –33.09±60.98 | 0.592 | 2303.05±158.01 | 2409.18±87.62 | +336.44±307.06 | 0.268 | |||||
| Flow‐mediated dilation normalized for shear, a.u. | 0.0029±0.0004 | 0.0023±0.0003 | –0.0006±0.0001 | <0.001 | 0.0026±0.0003 | 0.0122±0.0178 | +0.0096±0.0179 | 0.6810.646 | |||||
| Dilation to sublingual nitroglycerin, % | 27.15±1.98 | 25.17±1.87 | –1.41±0.17 | 0.895 | 28.66±4.35 | 27.66±4.58 | –1.00±1.07 | 0.447 | |||||
Data are reported as mean±SE. Student t‐test was used unless otherwise specified.
Wilcoxon signed‐ranks test was used. Medians (interquartile range); e‐hookah plasma nicotine: pre, 0.50 (0.00) vs post, 4.90 (7.55); Cliff delta effect size=0.034; e‐hookah expired carbon monoxide: pre, 3.00 (1.33) vs post, 3.00 (1.00); Cliff delta effect size=0.005; sham plasma nicotine: pre, 0.50 (0.00) vs post, 0.50 (0.00); Cliff delta effect size=0.020; and sham flow‐mediated dilation normalized for shear: pre, 0.0028 (0.0014) vs post, 0.0037 (0.0340); Cliff delta effect size=0.020.
FIGURE 2Acute effects of e‐hookah vs sham vaping on endothelial function.
(A) Individual and mean percentage changes before and after 30‐minute of e‐hookah vaping. (B) Individual and mean percentage changes before and after 30‐minute of sham vaping. Statistical analysis is by Student t‐test. FMD indicates flow‐mediated dilation.
FIGURE 3Effects of intravenous ascorbic acid on baseline endothelial function.
Group mean and individual responses depicting baseline augmentation in endothelial function pre‐e‐hookah vaping without vs with intravenous infusion of ascorbic acid. White circles, individual responses. Statistical analysis is by Student t‐test. FMD indicates flow‐mediated dilation.
FIGURE 4Acute effects of e‐hookah vaping without and with pretreatment of intravenous ascorbic acid on endothelial function.
(A) Group mean depicting acute reductions in endothelial function in responses to 30‐minute e‐hookah vaping without vs with intravenous infusion of ascorbic acid. (B) Group mean and individual responses depicting acute reductions in endothelial function in responses to 30‐minute e‐hookah vaping without vs with intravenous infusion of ascorbic acid. White circles, individual responses; filled circles, group mean. Statistical analysis is by Student t‐test. FMD indicates flow‐mediated dilation.